Skip to main content

Full text of "History of Hadley : including the early history of Hatfield, South Hadley, Amherst and Granby, Massachusetts"

See other formats

'AWsJi'i W I Sw Kan «vAi/ W \\\\y I <',' 



^ 'mM' 



A o. 








%^ ''- 


^ -'or.*- ,0^ % " 

(5 ^ '^ 


■>■,/ ''>m'.^--^.,<^' 






V « 

. » • • ' ''> 

^^v^v- ./\ •»:.• ^-^'^ "/'^^- '^-^ 

r. „ . G 


4 o 









J i^^^cJ^-^^^Z^W^ 


History of Hadley 


Early History of Hatfield, South Hadley 
Amherst and Granby 


By Sylvester Judd 


George Sheldon 


Family Genealogies 

By Lucius M. Boltwood 

Published by H. R. Huntting ^ Company 

Springfield, Mass. 1905 



Two OoBles Koceivad » 

AU(j 28 1905 I 
Oeoynght Entry ^ 
' 4'. / 9 <y i 
<^ Me. Mm 
/ JO ^ f 9 

Copyright, 1905 by 






The town of Hadley is one of the oldest in the Connecticut valley. 
Differences of opinion in relation to discipline, baptism, and the qualifi- 
cations for church membership, had so rent the churches of Hartford and 
Wethersfield, that Gov. John Webster, Elder William Goodv^'in, and Rev. 
John Russell, with their friends, at length decided to seek a new home at 
a higher point on the river. 

To brave the journey of fifty miles through the wilderness and to lay 
again the foundations of a new town, was of course no small undertaking, 
yet the peace of the Colony requiring it, such was their resolve. Accord- 
ingly, on the 1 8th of April, 1659, the company to the number of sixty, 
met at the house of Nathaniel Ward in Hartford, and signed an agreement 
for their regulation and government, pledging themselves to remove to the 
"plantation purchased on the east side of the river of Connecticut, beside 
Northampton," as early as the 29th of September of the following year. 
For various reasons, twenty of the original signers failed to fulfil their en- 
gagements, yet their places were supplied by others, the town was settled, 
and has ever since continued to prosper. 

To trace the history of this enterprise, from its inception to the present 
time — to relate the toils, privations and dangers which beset the path of 
our ancestors — to describe their mode of life — to tell what they did for the 
cause of learning and religion — and to give some account of their families, 
is the object of the present work. In carrying out this purpose, no avail- 
able source of information has been overlooked. 

Induced by no expectation of pecuniary reward, but stimulated by an 
ardent love for historical research and a desire to preserve from destruc- 
tion the crumbling materials of a long and interesting history, at the press, 
ing solicitation of Major Sylvester Smith, Sylvester Judd, Esq.., com- 
menced the publication of this work. To it he devoted every moment 



which health would allow, and continued his labors until removed by 

With not a little reluctance, at the earnest desire of his family, shortly 
after Mr. Judd's decease, did I consent to complete the work commenced 
by one, who has well been styled, "the distinguished antiquary of North- 
ampton." To this task, amid a pressure of other duties, have I devoted 
my leisure moments; and having brought together the scattered fragments 
of family history left by Mr. Judd, and added to the same from my own 
collections, I am able at length to lay before the public, the result of my 
labors, having pursued the work with interest heightened by being able 
to trace my own descent from no less than five of those noble men, who 
more than two hundred years ago, in prayer and faith, laid such goodly 
foundations in this garden of New England. 


Amherst, March, 1863. 


Containing a Careful Study of the Lives of the Regicides 

AND an Inquiry into the Historical Basis of 

THE "Angel of Hadley" Legend. 


There are events in the history of Hadley of which her citizens 
are, and of right ought to be, very proud. They may tell of heroes 
living and dying there, whose dust sanctifies their soil — heroes of 
war, and heroes of peace. The actions of the former are usually 
on a stage where they can be seen and known of all men. For 
the most part these live and act conscious of a watching world, 
and assured that lasting memorials will perpetuate their names 
and deeds. We point to Hadley's farmer-soldier General Hooker 
on Beacon Hill. 

To the heroes of peace all this incentive to action is notably 
wanting. Their noblest deeds are often done in emergencies, 
on a sudden impulse, with no applauding crowd; more often 
without a witness, and with no thought of present reward or 
future fame. The greatest hero of Hadley, however, was of a 
still nobler and finer mold. Actuated by pure motives of humanity, 
sympathy and duty, and the loftiest pitch of patriotism, he patiently 
wrought in darkness and in silence. Through the anxious days and 
linge.';ing nights of more than ten years, he bravely stood within 
a hand's breadth of the gates of ignominious death. He never 
faltered for a single hour, nor ever sought to shift upon another 
the burden and responsibility. Month after month, summer and 
winter, year after year, zealously watching and guarding his 
trust, John Russell was virtually a prisoner within his own 
hamlet. Under his very rooftree he was secreting Edward 
Whalley and William Goffe, two of the patriot judges who con- 


demned to the scaffold that misguided and perfidious represen- 
tative of the "divine right of kings," Charles I., of England. 
These tv^o men w^ere nov^ proscribed; a price was set upon their 
heads, and a swift retribution awaited any who might relieve or 
conceal them. Any neglect of precaution, any unforeseen mishap 
to the premises, any single case of misplaced confidence, and both 
he and his guests were surely doomed to nameless torture and 
death. Of necessity there must have been those about him in 
the secret, but none failed him, although each knew that a single 
whispered word would bring a rich reward. All honor to these 
faithful souls. 

Whalley and Goffe were known to be in Boston in 1660, and 
also in New Haven in 1661; and zealous minions of Charles II. 
were for twenty years ransacking every corner of the Colonies 
with the ardor and persistence of bloodhounds; their very house 
of refuge was searched. Over these two men, themselves of 
heroic proportion, lovers of liberty, patriots of the highest type, 
Mr. Russell was in truth the real "Guardian Angel of Hadley." 

In 1672 Mr. Russell was appointed to a place of trust and honor, 
which would have taken him to Boston free of expense twice each 
year. This very desirable service he declined by letter, saying 
guardedly, that he must do so on account of "the special worke 
where with I stand charged." Seldom or never in all the years in 
which he was guarding that trust, could the steadfast pastor get a 
release from the stated Sunday and Fast Day service by an ex- 
change of pulpits; not once the refreshment and inspiration which 
the country minister was wont to get in the "Annual Conven- 
tion" at Boston. 

In 1674 GofFe writes to his wife that her father, General Whal- 
ley, was fast nearing his end; but no one knows when the day of 
rest came. All knowledge of the time or place of Goffe's departure 
has also passed with him behind the veil. In 1685, however, we 
find the faithful watchman breathing the free air of Boston. 
Probably his "special worke" came to an end finally with a 
second burial in his cellar. Mr. Russell died in 1692. Hadley 
has indeed reason to be proud of such sublime heroism as his, and 
it is passing strange that her citizens have so long delayed placing 
an indestructible memorial to mark the spot where, even in the 
shadow of the grave, loom up the truly grand proportions of John 
Russell. Here shone forth his intense love of liberty. Here he 
stood ready to sacrifice his life, in showing honor for the daring 
deeds of these two apostles of civil freedom, whom he was shield- 
ing from a horrible death. Here he emphasized his belief, that 


"Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God."' Evidence is not 
wanting, that the time is now ripe for Hadley to honor itself by 
doing honor to her most noble nobleman, brave John Russell; 
and we may hope and expect with confidence, that this long- 
delayed duty will soon be an actual achievement. His descendants 
may be scattered far and wide; but let Hadley see to it that his 
fame with her shall ever abide. 

The story of the town has been told with rare interest in Judd's 
History of Hadley. This book has been long out of print. More 
than thirty years ago, I bought the only copy I could find on sale 
in Boston. As it is indispensible to any well-equipped library of 
Americana, public or private, and has become so scarce that its 
price has reached a prohibitory figure to most students, there can 
be no question about the necessity of a new edition. Judd's 
History has been known as a standard work ever since it was 
issued. It not only covers Hadley, but the territory for a score 
of miles up and down the valley of the Connecticut. In it the 
searcher after knowledge of the manners and customs of the early 
days will find a full field from which to garner colonial, ecclesias- 
tical, scholastic, civic, industrial, mercantile, legal and legendary 
lore. The very opening chapter contains a clue to the obscure, 
but interminable church quarrels so common and persistent 
among our Puritan and Pilgrim fathers and mothers. The causes, 
when we can unlock their confusing mysteries, seem to us trivial, 
but examination shows that by these earnest, honest men and 
women, they were considered vital and controlling, as being 
matters of eternal consequence. It was one of these disturb- 
ing events in Connecticut that determined when and by whom 
Hadley should be settled. 

Judd was an enthusiastic student; generally seeking the material 
for his history at first hand — in old parchment-covered record 
books, files of musty time-stained papers, tattered letters, and 
long-forgotten diaries. Those who have seen the mass of his 
accumulated papers are surprised at the extent and diversity of 
his research. Although fate decreed that Mr. Judd should not 
have the final arrangement of his great store of genealogical data, 
this work was successfully accomplished by Hon. Lucius M. 
Boltwood, and is, and always will be, a rich mine for the delver 
after family history in the valley of the Connecticut. 

As before said, Mr. Judd must always be looked up to as a 
sound historical authority of the highest rank. If once in a great 
while he be found tripping, we can but say, that it is the common 
lot of all who depend upon original manuscript. New material 


of this kind may and often does come to light, for the use and 
edification of the later writer. There was one topic upon which 
the painstaking Judd was led astray; that was in giving undue 
credit to President Ezra Stiles, in his History of the Three 
Judges. Through his faith in the standing of the man, Judd 
accepted as history, without his usual investigation, the Leverett 
Tradition, that on Sept. i, 1675, Hadley was attacked by Indians 
while the inhabitants were assembled in the meetinghouse holding 
a Fast Day service, and that the town was only saved from destruc- 
tion by the sudden appearance of General Goffe, at a critical 
moment. If this story is otherwise read by me, and my version 
be accepted as true, I am here embarrassed by an apparent claim 
to be the better student. I am not, and far be it from me to make 
such a claim. It may not be improper to say, that in common with 
all the later historians of New England, I had accepted the ac- 
count of President Stiles as an established fact, and no more 
thought of calling in question the authenticity of the Goffe story, 
than of any accepted fact of history, I had seen, however, so 
many traditions discredited in my general reading, that I had 
made it my rule to take nothing second hand which could be 
personally investigated, and so when possible, I went to the same 
original sources of information as my author. This I soon found 
necessary to the spirit of independent thought and expression, 
for not seldom, I found myself differing from the author in hand, 
in my interpretation of the same facts. 

It was in accordance with the above rule, that I began mining 
for the foundation of the "Angel of Hadley" story. To my sur- 
prise, I soon discovered that the corner stone, instead of being laid 
on bed rock or solid masonry, rested on nothing better than 
elusive quicksand. Had Mr. Judd entertained the faintest sus- 
picion about the main fact of the story, I make no doubt he would 
have investigated the matter, and would have reached the same 
conclusion which was fairly forced upon me. With all his general 
faith in Stiles, Judd was compelled to question some of his posi- 
tions on this subject, occasionally disputing him point blank; 
and he shows that some of the traditions upon which Stiles built, 
were "certainly false." Many other items are treated with 
small respect, "Some of which must be rejected," he says. Mr. 
Judd would doubtless be the last man to regret that the romantic, 
but baseless episode of the Angel of Rescue, so cherished by the 
sentimental, should be eliminated from the annals of the town, 
when its most potent factor is proved to be but the child of an 
indiscriminating credulity. 


It is expected by the publishers of the new edition of Judd's 
History that the Introduction shall contain a concise review of 
the evidence upon which rests the story of the Angel of Hadley, 
as given by Stiles and accepted in the main feature by Judd. 
Necessarily the field to be explored is obscure, the facts to be 
dealt with, fragmentary, widely scattered and individually of 
small account; but all these facts focused upon the objective point, 
will, it is hoped, give a final quietus to the angel fabrication being 
accepted as history. As material for romantic fiction, the myth 
will live for ages. 

General Edward Whalley and General William GofFe were 
members of the "High Court of Justice," which was the forlorn 
hope of civil and religious liberty for the English race, and which 
with one desperate blow so shattered the battlements of Preroga- 
tive, that its walls never have been and never can be fully built 
up again. With the restoration of Charles II., these two men fled 
to New England. When they left London, the King had not been 
proclaimed, but the news reached them while yet in the English 
Channel. The good ship of Captain Pierce, which brought them 
over, "came to anchor between Boston and Charlestown," July 
27, 1660. Whalley had assumed the name of Richardson, and 
Goffe the name of Shepardson. They at once took up their 
residence at Cambridge. The quotations which follow are from 
the diary of General GofFe. 

"July 29th, Lord's Day, heard Mr. Mitchell preach." They 
were well received here by men who knew their real character. 
Mitchell was the minister of Cambridge. "Aug. 9th, Went to 
Boston Lecture, heard Norton, Scotch ship brought threatned 
recognition by one who came in it. At night Maj. [Daniel] 
Gookin showed us a printed paper y' was brought by the Scotch 
Ship wherin the Lds doe order 66 members of the High Court of 
Justice to be secured with y"" Estate." 

While at Cambridge they also attended an Indian Lecture, 
probably by the apostle Eliot, and GoflPe makes note of the dis- 
cussion which followed and the searching questions put by the 
natives. After Aug. 9th, the Judges made no pretence of conceal- 

"Aug. i6th, Sup'd with Mr. Chauncey [President of Harvard 
College] he was persuaded y^ Ld had brought us to this country 
for good both to them and ourselves." 

"Aug. 23d, visited Elder Frost," and on the 26th they were 
visited by Mr. Mitchell. By the above may be seen their status 
in Boston. So the Judges waited coming events. Would Charles 


be sustained ? They had not long to wait. November 30th, a ship 
brought news that the King was firmly established on the throne, 
and furthermore, that complaints were abroad about the way the 
Judges had been received in the Colony. Action here became 
necessary, and on December 19th an "Address to the King" was 
sent over by the General Court. A gracious reply was returned by 
Charles. Before this had been received, however, orders had 
arrived for the apprehension of Whalley and Goffe. February 
22d the Court of Assistants met to consider the matter. The 
members did not agree upon any action, and nothing followed; 
but all saw that a crisis was near, and means were found to send 
the Judges away from the Bay. They were guided by an Indian 
as far as Springfield, and thence by Simon Lobdel through 
Hartford, reaching New Haven March 7, 166 1. A few days 
after they left Cambridge, a "Hue-and-Cry " w^as received from 
England, and March 8th, a warrant for their arrest was sent to 
Springfield, on their trail. But the birds had flown, as was 
doubtless expected. 

The pretended efforts of Governor Endicott did not blind 
observers in England. One Mr. Lang whites Rev. John Daven- 
port at New Haven, Oct. 28, 1661, "The Bay stirring soe much 
for the Apprehending of W: ^ G: signifie at present heere but 
little, because they were so long with them & then did nothing." 
Governor Endicott did not succeed altogether in saving his credit, 
but the Judges had fled beyond his jurisdiction and he was saved 
further embarrassment. They were well received as befitting 
their rank, by the leading men of Hartford and New Haven. 
They were probably sheltered under the roof of Rev. Mr. Daven- 
port at New Haven, but not for long. 

Forced by royal mandate, on the 7th of May, 1661, Governor 
Endicott sent Thomas Kellond, captain of an English ship, and 
Thomas Kirk, a young Boston merchant, two zealous royalists, 
to search for the Judges, as far south as New York. On their 
return May 29th, they made a detailed Report to Governor 
Endicott. From this Report we learn that they reached Guilford, 
Conn., May nth, 1661, and had a conference with William 
Lette, acting governor. On the 12th or 13th, they arrived at 
New Haven. There some time was spent in ineff"ectual eff'orts to 
induce the magistrates to give them authority to search for the 
Judges. The agents were put ofi^ chiefly by pretended difficulties 
in matters of authority. They say, "And soe findeing them 
obstinate and pertenaceous in their contempt of his Majestie, 
we came away the next day in prosecution after them, according 


to instructions, to the Governour of Manadas," by whom they 
received civil treatment and fair promises; after which "Wee 
made our returne by sea to give your honor an accompt." 

To this relation they made oath. News of the coming of Kel- 
lond and Kirk was received at New Haven by Mr. Davenport 
in advance of their arrival, and the Judges were spirited away 
to a safe retreat. Later a search of New Haven was made by 
the authorities, which ended as intended. The Judges remained 
in hiding in and about New Haven and Guilford until 1664, 
when, learning that Commissioners from England had arrived 
in Boston with special orders to search for Whalley and Goffe, it 
was thought they were no longer safe in Connecticut; and on the 
13th day of October, 1664, they began their long night journey 
through the woods to the house of Rev. John Russell, in Hadley. 
That little plantation was only five years old, but its sturdy stock, 
the pick of three towns, had already taken firm root in the virgin 
soil. The minister, who had led his flock out of a theological 
snarl in Connecticut, was leader still. Peter Tilton, the magis- 
trate, stood next in position. All were men of strong parts and 
sterling principles; men to be relied upon should the worst befall. 
In this little town, deep in the wilderness, the worn and hunted 
men found a sure refuge. One of them for a certainty here finished 
his checkered career, and here I believe his ashes still rest in an 
undiscovered grave. As to the younger. General Goffe, doubts 
may properly be raised. 

From Hadley the exiles corresponded by letter with their 
friends in England and in New England, under assumed names. 

The question of the Indian attack on Hadley Sept. i, 1675, 
and the appearance of the "Good Angel" Goffe to the rescue, 
will be considered in a general review of the evidence in the case. 
The wide dissemination of this story is chiefly due to Ezra Stiles, 
President of Yale College, in his History of the Three Judges 
published in 1794. For this work, Doctor Stiles attempted to 
make an exhaustive search in all directions for material, and he 
shows a commendable zeal and industry in hunting for recorded 
facts and traditions. Unfortunately, however, there appears to 
be in him a lack of the judicial quality. He delights to eat and 
drink of traditions, but he fails in their digestion. He plainly 
exhibits a certain twist in his make-up, which inclines him to give 
more weight to a faint family tradition, than to verified contem- 
poraneous facts. In justification of this criticism, I will cite a 
single example. I have spoken of the mission of Kellond and 
Kirk to New Haven, and their sworn return to Governor Endicott. 


This Report is printed in full by Doctor Stiles. The salient facts 
are, that the emissaries spent three days in fruitless efforts to obtain 
a warrant to enable them to search for the Judges. Failing in 
this, on the fourth day, they left Connecticut for New York, 
without making any search; and from New York they say "Wee 
made our returne by sea, to give your honor an accompt." After 
giving this Report, Stiles comments upon it thus: "They arrived 
at New Haven the 13th day; and it should seem that they left 
the town the next day, and this without any search at all; and 
particularly, no mention is made of their interview with Mr. 
Davenport. But the constant tradition in New Haven is, that 
they diligently searched the town, and particularly the house of 
Mr. Davenport, whom they treated with asperity, and repre- 
hension. ... It would seem that they [the Judges] were not in 
town while the pursuivants were here." 

Now, in the face of this Report and his own comments, Stiles 
in the same chapter gives page after page of obscure and con- 
flicting traditions, which he tries to soften and reconcile, to prove 
that Kellond and Kirk did search several houses, and that the 
Judges had several narrow escapes in the process. Further, 
that the pursuers returned home from New York not by sea, 
but through New Haven, where they continued the search; for 
so say some family traditions. Such treatment of evidence 
warrants a very careful scrutiny of other conclusions arrived at 
by Doctor Stiles. The knowledge that Whalley and Gofi'e were 
concealed at Hadley was "first made known to the world" in 1764, 
by Governor Thomas Hutchinson in his "History of Massachu- 
setts." In collecting material for this history, Hutchinson visited 
Hadley, and sought to find and garner every scrap of tradition 
concerning the Judges that might have floated down on the years 
of a century which he knew had passed since their lot had been 
cast in that town. His errand appears to have been nearly barren 
of results. Apparently no one there had any knowledge or 
tradition connecting Hadley with the judges. The result of his 
research so far as it appears, is this: "The tradition at Hadley 
is that two persons unknown were buried in the minister's 
cellar." That and no more. 

In 1793, President Stiles, while hunting material for his history 
of the Judges also spent some time in Hadley. He aroused the 
interest and secured the help of Rev. Samuel Hopkins, who had 
been the minister there since 1754. They made diligent search 
among the older people for any and every possible scrap of tradi- 
tion or legend — "Even fabulous ones," says Doctor Stiles — in 


any way concerning the astounding revelation of Hutchinson in 
1764. Nothing direct or substantial was discovered. They 
found a few faint and shadowy traditions, varying and contra- 
dicting one another, although all pointed toward the fact of 
strangers, in the long past, being concealed in the houses of Mr. 
Russell and Mr. Tilton; and that "one of them died in the town, 
those who remember which, say Whalley." The results from this 
search are embodied in a letter from Mr. Hopkins to President 

There is good reason to believe that the names of Russell, 
Tilton, and Whalley were later additions to the traditions. In 
this volume Judd printed all that was obtained by Stiles and 
Hopkins. Here will be found faint echoes of the real state of 
affairs at Hadley which leaked out in hints dropped by some of 
those in the deadly secret, long after all danger had passed. One 
of these traditions which appears the most trivial, is in reality 
the only one bearing internal evidence of being authentic. It 
shows conclusively that as late as 1725-30, while there were 
vague rumors in the air easily referable to the judges, nothing 
was publicly known about the facts in the case. There were only 
unrelated stories. This one tradition follows. Doctor Stiles states, 
that in May, 1792, he visited at Wethersfield, Conn., Mrs. Porter, 
"a daughter of Mr. Ebenezer Marsh, and born at Hadley, 1715, 
next door to Mr. Tilton's." In reply to his questionings, she 
told him that before she left Hadley, "there were many flying 
stories, but so uncertain that nothing could be depended on." 
She said that "When she was a girl, it was the constant belief 
among the neighbors that an old man, for some reason or other, 
had been buried in the fence between Deacon Eastman's and her 
father's" so that each could "be able to say that he was not buried 
in his lot; but why he should be buried in the lot at all, and not 
in the public burying place, she had never heard any reason or 
tradition. She said the women and girls . . . used to meet at the 
dividing fence, and while chatting and talking together for amuse- 
ment, one and another at times would say, with a sort of skittish 
fear and laughing, 'Who knows but what we are now standing 
on the old man's grave.'" The significance of this extract from 
Stiles, of which Hopkins could learn nothing, will appear when 
we come to consider his declaration that the story of Gofi^e, the 
angel, was known to everybody about 1690. 

I will now take up the main object of this presentation, and give 
consideration to the letter from Hopkins to which I have alluded. 
It was written to Doctor Stiles March 26, 1793. I shall comment 


only upon this significant passage which covers the gist of the 
Angel Story. "Most of whom I have enquired for tradition say, 
that while they [the Judges] were here, the Indians made an 
assault upon the town; that on this occasion a person unknown 
appeared, animating and leading on the inhabitants against the 
enemy and exciting them by his activity and ardours; that when 
the Indians were repulsed, the stranger disappeared — ^was gone 
— none ever knew where, or who he was. The above is the general 
tradition among us. I shall now notice some things which were 
in the tradition, as given by some differing from the above, or 
adding somewhat to it." Then follow the stories which have 
been characterized as misty, and inconclusive. In none of these, 
it must be noted, is there the slightest reference to the attack on 
Hadley September ist, which Hopkins says in his letter, "is the 
general tradition among us." Whence comes this "general tra- 
dition".? Not from the stories which he gathered from the old 
families, and quotes. The source is not far to seek. Hutchinson, 
as we have seen, could not find at Hadley the slightest tradition 
or trace of Whalley or Goffe by name. The total result of his 
search was the story that "Two persons unknown, were buried 
in the minister's cellar." That, in 1763, was the sum and sub- 
stance of Hadley tradition. Col. Israel Williams, an intimate 
personal and political friend of Hutchinson, was born and lived 
all his days within cannon shot of the house of Mr. Russell, and 
had known hundreds of people whose fathers or grandfathers 
were contemporary with the events at Hadley in 1675, but he 
could add nothing to this meager information. If no trace of the 
Angel Story was to be found in 1763, how comes it to be so "gene- 
ral" in 1793 ? 

In 1764 Hutchinson published his history. For the first time, 
the generation then on the stage knew that the two Judges had 
ever been given shelter in Hadley. Here then is the base of this 
general tradition of 1793. After this strange revelation by the 
historian, it became the common topic of conversation. The 
matter was, of course, talked over and over by old and young, 
until at length it was incorporated in the town talk, and the people 
gradually assumed that the facts had always been known in the 
community. In truth they had always existed, to those born after 
1763. In view of what is now known, this seems a simple and 
justifiable solution of the "general tradition" of which Hopkins 
writes in 1793. 

We shall study Hutchinson's History only so far as it relates 
to Whalley and Goffe. When he wrote he had in his possession 


that part of the diary of General GofFe from May 4, 1660, the 
time he left England, until 1667. Up to that date Hutchinson's 
knowledge is absolute and cannot be questioned. After that 
date his narrative is more general although he held other original 
papers. The latter are now accessible and have been freely used 
in preparing this introduction. 

In his book, Hutchinson gives a general account of the arrival 
and reception of Whalley and Goffe at Boston and Cambridge, 
and of their sojourn at New Haven and Hadley. He says, "The 
story of these persons has never yet been published to the world. 
It has never been known in New-England. Their papers, after 
their death, were collected and have remained near an hundred 
years in a library in Boston." In a footnote of several pages 
Hutchinson enlarges; tells more particulars of their hiding and 
adventures at New Haven, until October 13th, 1664, when "they 
removed to Hadley near an hundred miles distant, travelling only 
by night, where Mr. Russell the minister of the place had pre- 
viously agreed to receive them. Here they remained concealed 
fifteen or sixteen years, very few persons in this Colony being 
privy to it," This footnote closes thus; and here is the nut to be 
cracked: "I am loth to omit an anecdote handed down 
through Governor Leveret's family. I find GofFe takes notice 
in his journal of Leveret being at Hadley. The town of Hadley 
was alarmed by the Indians in 1675, in the time of public service, 
and the people were in the utmost confusion. Suddenly, a grave, 
elderly person appeared in the midst of them. In his mein and 
dress he differed from the rest of the people. He not only encour- 
aged them to defend themselves, but put himself at their head, 
rallied, instructed and led them on to encounter the enemy, who 
by this means were repulsed. As suddenly the deliverer of Hadley 
disappeared. The people were left in consternation utterly unable 
to account for the strange phenomenon. It is not probable that 
they were ever able to explain it." 

We note this is not given as history by Hutchinson, but only as an 
"anecdote" and merely in a footnote. The mysterious stranger 
is not mentioned at all in the body of the book where he gives the 
history of Philip's War. Not only this, but he gives good reasons 
why the story could not be true. His notice of the affair described 
in the "anecdote" is this — "September the ist, Hadley was 
attacked upon a fast day, while the people were at church, which 
broke up the service, and obliged them to spend the day in a very 
different exercise." This much of the "anecdote" was accepted 
by the historian, as there is no other authority for it. Upon this 


Stiles enlarges, thus: "Though told with some variation in dif- 
ferent parts of New-England, the true story of the Angel is this: 
During their abode in Hadley, the famous . . . Philip's War took 
place . . . and Hadley . . . was then an exposed frontier. That 
pious congregation were observing a Fast at Hadley on the 
occasion of this war: and being at public worship in the meeting- 
house there on a Fast day, September i, 1675, were suddenly 
surrounded and surprised by a body of Indians. . . The people 
immediately took to their arms, but were thrown into great con- 
sternation and confusion. Had Hadley been taken the discovery 
of the Judges had been inevitable. Suddenly, and in the midst 
of the people there appeared a man of a very venerable aspect, and 
different from the inhabitants in his apparel, who took the com- 
mand, arranged and ordered them in the best military manner, 
and under his direction they repelled and routed the Indians, and 
the town was saved. He immediately vanished, and the inhabit- 
ants could not account for the phenomenon, but by considering 
that person as an Angel sent of God on that special occasion for 
their deliverance; and for some time after said and believed 
that they had been delivered and saved by an Angel — nor did 
they know or conceive otherwise till fifteen or twenty years after, 
when it at length became known at Hadley that the two Judges 
had been secreted there; which probably they did not know until 
after Mr. Russell's death in 1692. This story, however, of the 
Angel at Hadley, was before this universally diffused thro' New- 
England by means of the memorable Indian War of 1675. The 
mystery was unriddled after the revolution, when it became not 
so very dangerous to have it known that the Judges had received 
an asylum here and that GofFe was actually in Hadley at that 
time. The Angel was certainly General GofFe, for Whalley was 
superannuated in 1675." 

Here we have the story of the attack September ist, and the 
full-fledged Angel enlarged from the "anecdote." Stiles has now 
woven it into history. This has been accepted by all historians, 
great and small, and spread broadcast over the civilized world. 
It is confessedly founded upon the anecdote — no other source of 
information is even hinted at. Doctor Stiles gives credit to 
Hutchinson for a new fact in Philip's War, which had been 
overlooked by all the contemporaneous historians. Hutchinson 
did indeed swallow so much of the myth as covered the attack; 
but he states distinctly, that GofFe could not have appeared in the 
fray, without its leading to his discovery and destruction. This 
was a self-evident conclusion. Stiles cannot be justified in 


discarding this statement and foisting the Angel story wrongfully 
upon Hutchinson. 

Now a word about the origin of the "Anecdote." It was either 
one stroke of some imaginative genius, or as is more probable, 
the gradual growth of generations in the fireside lore of the Leverett 
family. Its roots were no doubt planted in Mather's story of the 
"Alarm" at HadleySeptember 1st, publishedin 1676. Its branches 
may easily have been scions grafted on the knowledge of the facts 
in the case, handed down in the Leverett family, that the Judges 
were in Hadley on that same day. This is Mather's account of 
what really did happen at Hadley Sept. i, 1675, as given in his 
history of Philip's War. "One of the Churches in Boston was 
seeking the face of God by fasting and prayer before him. Also 
that very day, the Church in Hadley was before the Lord in the 
same way, but were driven from the holy service they were 
attending by a most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them 
the whole day after." 

There can be no doubt that Mather's story of the "alarm" at 
Hadley was true. The same could have been said of Hatfield and 
Northampton, when the astounding news reached them of the 
attack that day upon Deerfield. No doubt they too "were in the 
utmost confusion," while making preparation for their defence. 
The usual method of Indians in warfare is, to watch chances for a 
surprise; then a swift stroke, and speedy retreat. But at Deer- 
field the first shock was unsuccessful; the Indians lingered, and 
in a measure besieged the garrisons, expecting to lay the whole 
town in ashes; part being busy in plundering and burning, out of 
musket range from the stockades. In the meantime this condi- 
tion had been discovered and reported by scouts from below. It 
was the first attack upon any town in the valley, and what would 
be their fate after Deerfield had been destroyed, was the main 
thought. Of course, the people of Hadley were "in consternation 
by a most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them the whole 
day after," and doubtless a sleepless night followed. We must 
always note that Mather does not give the story of the alarm as 
part of the history of the war. He was dwelling strictly upon the 
dealings of God with the people, and the effect of prayer in turn- 
ing aside His wrath. 

The matter-of-fact Stoddard makes no note of this alarm. 
When sending Mather material for his "History of the War," 
he wrote only of the "Remarkable Passages." This alarm was 
such a trifle among the terrible tragedies of the two weeks covered 
by his letter, as not to be worthy of any note, and it is heard of 


only in the theological disquisition by Mather — save when it 
serves as a sub-base for the narrative of Stiles. 

Hutchinson says squarely that the know^ledge of the Judges' 
concealment at Hadley "had never been known to the world" 
before 1764, just one hundred years after the event. Stiles calmly 
ignores this declaration, and says unreservedly that the story of 
the mysterious stranger of September ist was known throughout 
the country in 1675-6, and that the stranger was believed to be an 
Angel until after 1688. Hutchinson was a Tory, his house had 
been sacked by a mob, and he had been driven from his native 
land. He died in comparative obscurity in 1780. Stiles was an 
earnest Whig, an ardent lover of civil freedom, a stout opposer 
of the Prerogative. Could he have supposed that the history of 
Hutchinson would also fall into disrepute, and be replaced by 
his own ? He knew full well how marvelous stories were adapted 
to the popular taste. 

We will now take up that part of the "anecdote" accepted by 
Hutchinson, and baldly say that the "Angel Story" could not 
be true for the reason that there was absolutely no attack on 
Hadley by Indians Sept. I, 1675. The evidence to support this 
declaration is chiefly negative, but it seems to me that it is positive 
in effect. In a history of Philip's War published in December, 
1676, Rev. Increase Mather, after giving an account of the fight 
at Sugar Loaf Aug. 25, 1675, continues: 

"Sept. I, The Indians set upon Deerfield (alias Pacumtuck) 
and killed one man and laid most of the houses in that new hope- 
ful Plantation in ruinous heaps. That which added solemnity 
and awfulness to that desolation, is that it happened on the very 
day when one of the churches in Boston [Mather's own] was 
seeking the face of God by Fasting and Prayer. Also that very 
day the church in Hadley was before the Lord in the same way, 
but were driven from the Holy service they were attending by a 
most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them the whole day 
after, sothat we mayhumbly complain, as sometime the Church did, 
' How long hast thou smoaked against the Prayers of thy People.' 
Not long after this Capt. Beers with a considerable part of his 
men fell before the enemy. Concerning the state of these parts 
at this time until Sept. 15, I received information from a good 
hand whilst things were fresh in memory, which I shall here 
insert as containing a brief History of the transactions which 
happened within the time mentioned [Sept. 1-15], these parts 
being the seat of the war. The letter I intend is that which fol- 


The letter referred to is in this volume. It is from Rev. Solo- 
mon Stoddard, then minister at Northampton, dated Sept. 15, 
1675. It is a long letter, reciting minutely the movements of the 
contending forces in the valley. Stoddard tells of the disarming 
of the near-by Indians, August 24th, the affair at Sugar Loaf, 
August 25th, and says, "We heard no more of the Indians till the 
first of September, when they shot down a garrison soldier at 
Pocumtuck, that was looking after his horse, and ran violently 
up into the town, many people having scarcely time enough to 
get into the garrison: that day they burnt most of their houses and 
barns, the garrisons not being strong enough to sally out upon 
them, but killed two of their men from their forts." He gives 
a full account of the tragic events which accompanied the dis- 
truction of Northfield, September 2-6; the second attack on 
Deerfield September 12th; the relief expedition, September 13th, 
and the arrival of Captain Moseley at Hadley, September 14th. 
Hadley is not named at all September 1st, and who knew theevents 
of that day better than Parson Stoddard .? 

Samuel Mather, nephew of Increase Mather, then minister at 
Deerfield, wrote his uncle the fullest account of the assault 
which has been found. With all this information before him, 
Mather gives not the slightest hint of any trouble at Hadley but 
the "Alarm," which was obviously on hearing the news from 
Deerfield. That was enough; for Deerfield, as I have said, was 
the first town in the valley which was attacked by Indians. 
Mather writes the next year a History of New England. Hubbard 
published his notable History of Philip's War in 1677. Several 
contemporary pamphlets and letters are extant, but not one of 
these affords a scintilla of light on the alleged attack on Hadley. 
We also look in vain in the History of the War by Cotton Mather, 
a few years later. In fact, not a single word can be found on the 
matter before 1764. If the attack September ist were a verity, 
why this silence ? 

Judd attempts an explanation: it was because the Judges were 
concealed there. He says, "It was necessary at the time and 
long after, to throw a veil over the transactions of that day, which 
has been, and can be, only partially removed." Let us examine 
this explanation — does it explain! How could this silence be 
enforced! The facts must have been known to every person in 
Hadley, inhabitants and soldiers; to all in Hatfield and North- 
ampton. The story must have been repeated to the hundreds 
of soldiers who came to Hadley that week, for there was the 
headquarters of the army and the gathering place of the forces 


from the East and from Connecticut. Silence might perhaps 
have been imposed upon the magistrates and ministers, but 
what of the miscellaneous multitude ? All must see the utter 
impossibility of keeping their mouths shut, when, in the very 
nature of the case, no reason could be given, without betraying 
the fatal secret. On the contrary, if the people of Hadley believed 
they had been saved from destruction by an angel sent of God, 
why should not this amazing thing be proclaimed from every 
pulpit with joy and thanksgiving, be discussed at every fireside 
in the land, and preached in every camp that they were the chosen 
people of the Lord! This was by far and far the most important 
event in the history of New England; and how soon would the 
news have spread to the uttermost parts of the earth; and how 
would the literature of the times have teemed with the marvelous 
story. How the superstitious savage would have quailed in terror 
at this act of the white man's God! The bloody events of the 
current week show no such effect. If true, why do we not find 
traditions or recorded facts in the families of Barnard, Baldwin, 
Boltwood, Coleman, Dickinson, Hawks, Moody, Porter, Russell, 
Smith, Warner, or Wells, who were on the spot; or in those of 
Allis, Arms, Belden, Cowles, Field, Frary, Gillet, Graves, Hub- 
bard, Hinsdale, Kellogg, Lyman, Munn, Montague, Marsh, 
Morton, Parsons, Pomeroy, Sheldon, Stebbins and scores of 
others in the surrounding towns, descendants of all of which 
families are now living among us? Look at the contrast! The 
knowledge of this wonderful deliverance of beset Hadley, by the 
act of the heroic Goffe, or the direct act of God, lay dormant and 
unknown for ninety years, to creep out at length through a tra- 
ditionary anecdote handed down in a single family in far-off 
Boston, and then only preserved in a marginal footnote to a 
printed page. But Hutchinson, even, who published the tradition, 
did not believe the mysterious appearance part of the story, and 
the part which he did accept quietly slumbered for thirty years 
longer, until it was revived and printed by President Stiles, and 
so scattered broadcast as veritable history. 

It is certainly strange that subsequent writers should have fol- 
lowed Stiles in the main feature of the story. Most of them added 
to or varied it, as their fancy dictated, or their judgment impelled. 
Hoyt can find no warrant for September ist, and changes the date 
to June 9, 1676. Judd and Huntington find the attack was not on 
the meetinghouse. Holland adds many new features, following 
Hoyt in the date, and brings Major Talcott over from Northamp- 
ton to be at the finish. Palfrey and Robbins add eloquent and 


picturesque descriptions. Farmer makes quite a different thing 
of it and quotes conversation with Goff"e. Drake accepted the 
story with great eff'ort, and can only fix the date " Some time during 
the war." 

There is one trifling but amusing feature which runs through 
all the accounts. We are expected to be impressed by the dra- 
matic exhibit, the venerable aspect of the stranger, his silver 
locks, his ancient garb, his flashing sword. Assuming that his 
wardrobe had not been replenished during his eleven years' stay, 
would it appear noticeably "ancient" in a land where garments 
were habitually handed down from father to son ? The man who 
wears my clothes is not pointed out on the street, although there 
has been no change in the fashion of his "garb " for well-nigh forty 
years. I do not believe the men of Hadley in 1675 were a bit 
more observant. The flowing locks of the old Round Head, and 
the ancient garb have been greatly overworked. I bid them a 
long adieu. 

The supposed grave of fVhalley. No one has ever been able to 
fix the exact date of Whalley's death, or the place of his burial. 
He was alive Aug. 5, 1674, but in a fast failing condition. It is 
generally agreed that he died within a few months. Of course, 
he was buried at Hadley. As to the exact place of burial, the tra- 
ditions or stories gathered by Hopkins and Stiles in 1793 at Hadley 
are worthless. There was not one direct tradition to be found. 
"It seems to have been a matter of conjecture among the inhabit- 
ants," half a dozen sites are guessed at. Taking an average. 
Stiles guesses that one of the Judges was buried at Mr. Russell's 
and one at Mr. Tilton's; that both were eventually removed to 
New Haven and laid near the grave of Dixwell, the third of the 
"Three Judges in America." No one is found supporting Stiles 
in this last supposition. Judd says, "It seems to be fabulous. . . 
It is certainly false in regard to Whalley, and is believed to be 
equally unfounded as to Goff'e. The necessity of secrecy would 
have prevented the removal as it must be done by oxen and cart." 
Judd thinks Whalley's grave has been found at Mr. Russell's. 
His views are stated in this volume. I will give a brief abstract, 
and my reason for a non-agreement. 

Mr. Russell's house stood on the east side of Main Street, 
fronting south. It was built in 1660 with no cellar. Its flank was 
on Main Street, and in 1662 a kitchen with a cellar was added to 
the rear. In this cellar, if anywhere at Mr. Russell's, Whalley 
was buried. In 1749 the house had passed to Samuel Gaylord. 
His son Chester Gaylord, born in 1782, informed Mr. Judd in 


1859, that before he was born his father took down and rebuilt 
the kitchen end, and "the old cellar remained." The main build- 
ing was not changed in any way. Chester said, that when a boy, 
he had often taken up a loose board and gone down to the hiding 
place of the Judges behind the chimney. In 1795, he said the 
front part of the house was replaced by a larger, the extension 
being to the south. The kitchen was left standing. Some of the 
changes involved I do not understand, but I quote from Judd all 
that is essential. "In taking down the middle part of the front 
wall next the Main Street, the workmen discovered about four 
feet below the top of the ground, a place where the earth was 
loose, and a little search disclosed flat stones, a man's bones, and 
bits of wood. Almost all the bones were in pieces, but one thigh 
bone was whole, and there were two sound teeth. A doctor 
examined the thigh bone and said it was the thigh bone of a 
man of large size. This and other bones were laid on a shelf and 
in a short time they all crumbled into small pieces." 

From the condition of these bones, I am convinced that they 
were not the remains of one of the Judges. They were too far 
gone in decay. It is more likely that this was the grave of an 
Indian buried long before Whalley came to Hadley. The grave 
may have been disturbed when the cellar wall of Mr. Russell's 
kitchen was built in 1662; most of the bones may have been 
scattered at that time. Reasons for my doubt are found in my 
own observation, reinforced by established facts. I have dug up 
many skeletons in my own home lot, owned in the family since 
1701, and owned by other white men from 1667. Some of the 
graves contained bones in the last stages of decay. In those of 
more recent burial, the entire skeletons were in perfect condition. 
One of these skulls is now on exhibition at Amherst College, 
another at Worcester, several at Washington, all solid and in 
lasting condition. One was used by Hon. James S. Grinnell for 
an inkstand. Generally full sets of teeth remained, some much 
worn. In one case I found several decayed teeth. There could 
have been no burial here for over 200 years. Whalley had been 
dead only 120 years. 

John Dixwell, another of the Judges, died at New Haven 
March 18, 1689. His remains were exposed Nov. 22, 1849, ^^^ 
hundred and sixty years after death. The Dixwell family of Bos- 
ton were placing a monument over the grave in honor of their 
ancestor. The bones of Dixwell were in perfect condition, the 
skull so entirely sound that exact measurements were made for 


the purpose of scientific comparison. He had been buried forty 
years longer than Whalley. 

I was informed by Miss Fanny Chesebrough, who had exact 
knowledge, that when the grave of Lady Alice Fenwick at 
Saybrook, Conn., was invaded at the behest of the heartless 
railroad, the skeleton was intact. On reburial it was found that 
nothing but a single finger bone was lacking. Lady Fenwick 
had been buried 250 years, more than twice as long as General 

Within a few years quite a number of complete Indian skeletons 
were discovered at Hadley. It may not be out of place to notice 
here the growth of a story, which has just come under my eye. 
Speaking of this very grave, the writer says, "The remains of 
Whalley were found in a stone vault, outside the wall of Mr. Rus- 
sell's cellar; it was covered by a single slab of hewn stone." Such 
is apt to be modern history as told in current literature. 

Another reason for discrediting this location of Whalley's 
grave is that the burial must have been made by digging on the 
main street, at the imminent risk of discovery, or by taking down 
part of the cellar wall from the inside, and making an excavation 
some three feet from the surface. In doing this, there would be 
great danger of caving in by wall and earth and consequent dis- 
covery. Then the wall must be relaid, and no old cellar wall can 
be so treated without leaving marks of the process. Again, a 
body laid so near a rough stone wall must in decomposition soon 
betray the secret. If the burial was in the cellar, as it doubtless 
was, the simple and natural thing to do was to dig the grave in 
the bottom of the cellar with no risk of discovery, and where the 
marks of disturbance could easily be concealed. As to the 
necessity of concealing the grave of the Judges, Doctor Stiles 
says, "Such was the vigilance, activity and malice of Randolph 
. . . that both their persons and ashes would not escape his ma- 
licious vengeance if discovered." It was known that the graves 
of their dead compeers in England had been violated in the most 
horrible manner. Stiles says further that so late as 1760 "some 
British officers passing through New Haven, and hearing of Dix- 
well's grave visited it, and declared with rancorous and malicious 
vengeance, that if the British Ministers knew it, they would even 

then cause his body to be dug up and vilified Crown 

officers so late as 1775" treated Dixwell's grave "with marks of 
indignity too indecent to be mentioned." 

The Removal of Goffe to Hartford. As I have said, the time of 
Goffe's death and place of burial are unknown. The general 


tenor of tradition at Hadley before treated upon, points to Hadley 
as the place. Whatever value these traditions may have, Judd 
believed the close of his career was in that town. Some of the 
stories there indicate his removal to New Haven, to Virginia, to 
the Narraganset Country, to the West Indies, to Hartford. This 
last tradition I think will be found true. 

Philip's War broke out in the summer of 1675. Hadley was 
made headquarters for the forces sent to the Connecticut Valley, 
and the troops must have been billeted largely upon the inhabit- 
ants. It has always seemed a marvel that Goffe could lie con- 
cealed in that little village during this confused and congested 
condition; and it is easy to believe that he might have been 
spirited away to Hartford. Scattered evidence that this was 
done will be briefly considered. 

While the Judges were in hiding at Hadley, they were in con- 
stant correspondence with friends and relatives in England and 
elsewhere, under assumed names. Rev. Increase Mather acted 
as clearing house in Boston. Many letters are extant which were 
sent through his hands. GofFe passed as Walter Goldsmith, Mrs. 
Goffe as his mother, " Frances Goldsmith." She was the daughter 
of Whalley, who was "Mr. Richardson." Rev. William Hooke 
was "D. G.," his wife, "Aunt Jane," was a sister to Whalley. 
It was in the Hooke family in London where the wife and children 
of Goffe found shelter. Circumstances brought about a change 
of residence. In the difl&culty about Goffe's making a connection 
with the new address, evidence appears that Goffe was not in 

As we all know the war brought desolation to the towns in the 
Connecticut Valley in the fall of 1675. In the spring of 1676 Mr. 
John Russell writes to the Bay a letter foreboding ill from the 
Indians, "We must look to feel their utmost rage. My desire is 
we may be willing to do or suffer, to live or die, remain in or be 
driven out as the Lord our God would have us." All signs 
pointed to trouble in the Valley, and for its protection Major 
Savage was sent with forces from Boston, with Samuel Nowell 
as chaplain; and Major Treat from Hartford, with John Whiting 
as chaplain. It is assumed that the hands of both chaplains 
will soon appear in the removal of Goffe, and notices of them 
will have a bearing on the evidence to be presented. Mr. Whiting 
was a leading man in Connecticut, and a minister of Hartford. 
His wife was Sybil, daughter of Edward Collins, an agent and 
correspondent of Goffe. His second wife was Phebe, daughter 
of Thomas Gregson, prominent at New Haven, a close friend of 


Governor Eaton, and of John Davenport, while they were giving 
shelter to the Judges about New Haven. Mr. Whiting's daughter 
Abigail married Jonathan Russell, son of John of Hadley, and 
after the death of Mr. Whiting, the widow Phebe became the wife 
of John Russell. 

With no such close family relations, Chaplain Nowell was of 
old Puritan stock, and was in full sympathy with GofFe and Rus- 
sell. He never settled in the ministry, but held high office in the 
civil life of the colony, was intimate with clergymen including 
Increase Mather; was agent for the colony in England and often 
there. He was a man of action, was chaplain at the Great Swamp 
Fight Dec. 19, 1675, "where his bravery was much applauded," 
using, it is intimated, "other than spiritual weapons." When on 
the march from Boston to Hadley under Savage, March, 1676, he 
criticises the officers for being outwitted by Indian strategy and 
not making an effective onslaught on the enemy about Wenimesset. 
Again, on the return march to Boston, Major Savage had conditional 
orders about striking the enemy in the swamps near the route. 
Arriving at Brookfield, a council of war was held to consider that 
question. The captains were opposed, while the intrepid Chap- 
lain Nowell voted for the attack. With the opening of spring, 
1676, the Indians made attacks on many of the outlying towns 
at the Bay. The authorities at Boston became much alarmed. 
The alarm soon grew to almost a panic. As Hubbard says, "It 
was now full Sea with Philip his Affairs." Orders were sent 
Major Savage to forthwith leave the valley to its fate, and march 
to the protection of the Bay. Only a forlorn hope was left with 
Captain William Turner. Hadley was no longer a safe retreat 
for Goffe. Who so likely as the impetuous Chaplain Nowell to 
take the risk of a night removal to Hartford, where Chaplain 
Whiting had prepared a place for his retreat. 

From letters at hand, extracts will be given which bear upon the 
question of Goffe's removal from Hadley. Inference may also 
be drawn as to the bodily and mental condition of Goffe. Sept. 
8, 1676, Goffe writes to Increase Mather: " Rever'd and Dear 
S'' I have received the letters from England that you enclosed 
to M'' Whiting and give you hearty thanks for your continued 
care in that matter. It is a great comfort to me to hear so fre- 
quently [from my] so far distant and dear relations, and I esteem 
it a great mercy, that (through your care) all our letters have 
hitherto passed without any one miscarrying. My dear Mo*^ [wife] 
writes that the last she received came safe tho' it wanted the 
outer covering they vsed to have. But she desired me to do so 


no more. ... I suppose their desire is that mine may be covered 
by yourselfe, as judging it most safe." This certainly indicates 
some change in location and mode of transmitting letters. In a 
second part of the same letter, GofFe w^rites, "I was greatly be- 
houlding to M"^ Noell for his assistance in my remove to this 
Town. I pray if he be yet in Boston, remember my affectionate 
respects to him." This could not refer to the removal to Hadley 
twelve years before. It must refer to Hartford as we shall see. 
Sept. 25, 1676, Samuel Nowell, our Chaplain, writes: "For 
his worthy friend M'' Jonathan Bull of Hartford." The letter 
was evidently written for the eye of Goffe. Its spirit agrees with 
our estimate of the writer. "Hon^ S"^, — The day before the 
arrivall of this bearer, M"" Bull, I had written a letter to my 
worthy friend M"^ Whyting & it was for your sake, in regard I 
did not know how to direct a few lines to you, & we have but little of 
news materiall stirring amongst us; there being no ship arrived 
lately from Engld. As for ourselves in New Engld, we are fearing 
a Generall Governour. How God will deale with us in our pres- 
ent buisinesse is uncertaine. I suppose you will judge it conven- 
ient to remove, if any such thing should happen, as that a Gov- 
ernour should be sent; although if this man live who is Governour 
at Boston [Governor Leverett], I believe the country will oppose, 
but if his head be once laid I do question whether he that shall 
come next will have spirit enough, or interest enough, to with- 
stand the Authority of Old Engld. I shall endeavour to give 
you as timely notice as I can from thence of whatsoever shall 
happen. I resolve to see your relations & so at present leave 
you under that Shaddow where you have been safe hithertoo. 
So desiring your prayers I rest, 

Y"' very humble serv', Samuel Nowell." 

It seems Nowell was going to England to watch the turn of 
affairs, and he would risk a visit to the family of Goffe. June 12, 
1677, Goffe writes Mather, "I have rec'd yours of 17th May, 
with those from England, as also the 12th left with you by M N." 
— doubtless Mr. Nowell. There is no signature to this letter. 
While at Hadley, Goffe's address was "Walter Goldsmith." 
Aug. 30, 1678, he signs another letter to Mr. Mather "T. D." 
He writes: "I have received the letter you sent me very lately 
from my dear Mo: for which with all your long continued kind- 
nesse, I heartily thank you; and am really ashamed to think how 
I am forced to be still so troublesome vnto you." In his letter 
from his wife he learns that Mr. Hooke, with whom she was 


living, had died, and that she had removed to another place; 
but she forgot to name the new address, although she gave it to 

Oct. 23, 1678, GofFe writes Mather as "T. D." "I lately gave 
you the trouble of a letter with one enclosed to my dear Mother, 
which should have been sent to a Friend that was to have returned 
to this Town, by whom I hoped to have rec''* a few words from 
yo'". But he falling ill, went not. So I was forced to give an 
honor'^ friend, the trouble thereof, who saide he would deliver it 
with his own hand. ... I was forced to send that to my Mo: with 
a naked superscription and this also because I am ignorant of 
both the place & person appynted (since Mr. Hooke, his death) 
to direct them to. ... I should take it as a great kindnesse to 
receive a word or two from you, if you please to enclose it to M"^ 
Whiteing, only with this short direction (Thes for M"^ T. D.). . . . 
It would be a great satisfaction to heare that you have rec^ my 
letters, and that you know the best way of sending them to Eng- 
land : & to be instructed by you, how to direct them for the future. 
Dear Sir, I desire to bear upon my Heart continually the many 
great concerns of this poor Countrey; especially of your Jurisdic- 
tion in reference to the many awfuU providences wherewith the 
Lord hath been awakening you." This refers to the political 
turmoil at Boston, and also to the prevailing small-pox. 

April 2, 1679, GofFe writes Mather again concerning "The 
various dispensations of Providence"; hopes he and his wife will 
receive "all the sanctified fruite of all his dealings with you. . . . And 
for your whole Jurisdiction. Oh that the Lord would help all 
his people there, to humble themselves vnder the mighty hand of 
God. . . . Then would he hear from heaven & forgive their sins 
& heale the land." No one in the jurisdiction of Massachusetts, 
would have written the above letters. GofFe was then in the juris- 
diction of Connecticut. The next direct evidence that the lone 
exile was in Hartford is found in a long letter to him from Peter 
Tilton, his old time Hadley friend. Extracts are given below. 
It is directed, probably under cover, to Mr. Whiting, "These 
for M-- T. D. present." 

"July:3o:i679: Worthye and much honor*^ S"",— Yours which I 
cannot but mention, dated M'^'\ 18: '78: I receaved, crying howe 
wellcome and refreshing to my poore unworthye selfe, (which as 
an honey combe, to use your owne similitude full of pretious 
sweetenes). I would you did but knowe, being a semblance or 
representation of what sometime though unworthye, I had a 
Fuller Fruition of;" referring to their former intercourse at 


Hadley. Tilton speaks of sending several books and papers, 
one of which he v^ants sent back — "it being borrowed, only, 
of a neighbour, I being desirous you might have a sight thereof. 
I have here sent you by S. P. [Samuel Porter of Hadley ?] tenn 
pounds haveing not before a safe hand to convey it, it being a token 
of the love and remembrance of severall friends who have you 
uppon their hearts." He speaks of the great news from England, 
"which I presume M"^ Russell hath given you a full account of, 
as understanding he hath written to Hartford, that I neede not 
tautologize in that matter." If Goffe were in Hadley, he might 
himself have borrowed the book, and Mr. Russell could have told 
him "the news from England " face to face. Tilton, however, goes 
on — "I know what is writt from England by good hands, which 
I have by me, viz. that the most sober and wisest there feare that 
Black Cloude hanging over the nation will breake uppon the 
Protestant Interest." After a page of saddening and gloomy items 
Tilton tries to give Goffe a gleam of encouragement in spite of 
the desponding information. "Deare Sir, I hope God is makeing 
way for your enlargement. In the meanetime my poore prayers 
for you are, the Lord would make your heart glad with the light 
of His Countenance, and that the Lord of Peace would give you 
peace allwayes and by all meanes; Remember before the Lord, 
your vnworthye Friend, willing to serve you. Vale, Vale. P. T." 
This tender benediction and farewell of good Mr. Tilton is 
literally the last word known to have been written to the misera- 
ble prisoner of fate. 

The act, with which the evidence of Goffe's residence at Hart- 
ford will close, has not to my knowledge been seriously con- 
sidered by any historian. It has, rather, been spoken of as 
a farce — a bit of foolery by a worthless scalawag. On the 
contrary, I am sure the event is real history, although hardly 
sober history, for certainly the farcical element largely prevails, 
and the fashion of the drama is seen where a terrible 
tragedy is followed by a comedy. The action of the story exactly 
fits the character of the prominent actors. None of these are 
amateurs. All have been before in the public eye. Governor 
Andros, the feared and hated; Governor Leete, the daring suc- 
cessful diplomat; Major Talcott, guest of John Russell; Secretary 
Allyn, the all-seeing; Captain Bull, the fearless and defiant; John 
London, the notorious and condemned liar. The stage is Hart- 
ford, the denouement June lo, 1680. The prophecy of Chaplain 
Nowell had come true — a "Generall Governour" of New Ensr- 


land had been appointed, and the time had now arrived when 
GofFe did "find it convenient to remove." 

April 20, 1680, John London of Hartford or Windsor, made an 
affidavit at New York "that Capt. Joseph Bull, Sen: had for 
several years past kept privately at his own house in Hartford, 
Col. GofFe, who went by the name of Mr. Cooke; that the depo- 
nent and one Dr. Robert Howard of Windsor, saw said GofFe at 
Capt. Bull's house in May 1679; that the deponent took measures 
to seize him and carry him to New York, but that one Thomas 
Powell, his neighbour disclosed his plans to Major Talcott and 
Capt. Allyn, — who caused the deponent to be arrested, charged 
him with conspiring against the Colony and forbade him to leave 
the county without license." He says that "James Richards 
who was the oldest member of the Council and the richest man 
in the Colony, was Agent of GofFe and that if he, London, dis- 
covered the matter it would tend to his own ruin." At the date 
of this affidavit, Richards was probably on his deathbed, — he died 
June lOth. If so, London may now have considered himself safe in 
denouncing GofFe and claiming the reward. His movement the 
year before had terminated in a manner quite unexpected, and 
he considered Richards as the active agent. London was a worth- 
less fellow, who had been imprisoned for deserting, malicious 
lying against the Colony, etc., and it was easy to squelch him in 
his attempt to secure GofFe. The validity of his story now rests 
on the attending circumstances. Doctor Howard and Thomas 
Powell named in the affidavit were alive; they could dispute his 
story, and as well, Major Talcott, Captain Allyn and others. 
Furthermore, the actions ofGovernorLeete, Talcott, and Allyn con- 
firm the truth of the tale. On the strength of London's affidavit, 
Governor Andros wrote to Governor Leete and the Assistants: 

"Honbl^ S"; 

Being informed by Deposicons here taken upon oath, that Coll. Goth 
hath been and is still kept and consealed by Capt. Joseph Bull and his 
sons in the Towne of Hartford und"" the name of Mr. Cooke the s'^ Goth 
and Coll. Whaley (who is since dead in y""" parts) haveing been persued 
as Traitors, that I may not be wanting in my duty, doe hereby give you 
the above intimacon, noe ways doubting of yo*" loyalty in every respect, 
and remaine 

Hon*''^ S""^, Your affectionate neighbour and 
Humble Servant, 

E. Andross. 
New Yorke, 
May 18, 1680. 


How fared this dispatch ? Hartford was one hundred miles 
away. A post riding express should have delivered it not later 
than noon on the 20th. The Colony records show that it was 
delivered to Leete June loth, twenty-one days later. In whose 
pocket had it reposed for three weeks ? We can only be sure that 
the owner of it was high in office and a good friend of Goffe. 

An affair of this kind was no new experience to Governor Leete. 
When acting governor of New Haven Colony, in 1661, he had 
dealt successfully, as we have seen, with the loyal messengers, 
Kellond and Kirk. Time was evidently taken to make provision 
for Goffe. When the coast was clear, it so happened that on June 
loth, Governor Leete, Secretary Allyn, and Major Talcott, were 
together, when the letter from Andros was received, no doubt to 
their great surprise. However, they seem to have been so well 
prepared for it, that "before we parted" they were able to send 
forth a long patriotic and carefully constructed warrant, without 
one earmark of haste upon it, based as they say, upon "letter to 
us just now received" from Governor Andros. The constable 
and marshal were ordered in high-sounding verbiage to visit the 
Bull's and "search in the houses, barns, outhouses & all places 
therein, for the sayd Col. Goffe," or any other place where there 
is "the least susspition. Hereof you may not fayle, as you will 
answer the contrary at your perill." 

The next day a long letter was sent to Andros from Hartford 
thanking him for his notice, and telling him of their prompt action, 
" being togetherwhen we received your letter." Heisinformed that 
after the diligent search, the officers "being upon oath, returned," 
that they "could find no such person as was mentioned, nor any 
stranger that in the least could be suspected to be any such person." 
They then say, "After the search o'' people were amased that 
any such thing could be suspected at Hartford, but the father of 
lyes is o"^ enemie & doth instigate his instruments to maligne this 
poore Colony, but we hope the Father of lights will vindicate vs 
in his due time." Andros is cautioned against believing all the 
flying stories against Connecticut, and told that if their men be- 
lieved all the stories against New York, it would breed bad blood 
between the Colonies. In every paper upon the subject the Gov- 
ernor and Assistants are careful to say that their action was instant 
upon receiving the letter, but we find no note of inquiry as 
to the tardy pace of the messenger; as though four and one-half 
miles a day was nothing uncommon for an express. There seems 
no need of further evidence, that for several years General Goffe 
was at Hartford. 


The influences affecting Gofi^e's condition during the period are 
revealed in what follows. In the earlier years of exile, the Judges 
were sustained by the expectation of being speedily made free by 
the downfall of Charles II. They had constant news of the politi- 
cal movements in Europe, and as the years dragged on with Charles 
in the ascendency, hope gradually died out, as may be seen by 
their letters. One by one the members of the "High Court of 
Justice" were taken and executed with the barbarity of Cannibal 
Islanders, some of them after a surrender on fair but false prom- 
ises. Others were betrayed by fickle friends to curry favor with 
the Crown. Some were murdered in foreign lands. One cheering 
report came to their ears, that they themselves had been killed 
in Switzerland. Mrs. Goffe, with her children, had been safe 
with her Aunt Jane Hooke, at London. She had kept the absent 
husband in touch with all household events; the death of one child 
in her years of promise, the marriage of another, the birth and 
death of a grandchild; had shared with him her joys and sorrows. 

But a change was to come. Mr. Hooke fell sick and Aug. 5, 
1674, Goffe wrote him a farewell letter. It was long and tender 
as befitting the occasion; but as "that Heavy word is not yet 
spoken," he still has "Hope the Lord may lengthen out your 
life & mine & so order things in His Providence, that I may yet 
see your face once again, even in this world, which hath indeed, 
nothing in it more Desirable than such faces." He deplores the 
necessity of his wife's removal, but hopes "the Lord who tells all 
her wanderings and puts her tears into his bottle . . . will provide 
some place where she may comfortably abide . . . and bless her 
& her poor afflicted family." It was soon after this that trouble 
began about their correspondence. Goffe was never able to find 
out the place of her abode. Goffe writes to Mather June 12, 1677, 
"I have rec'^ yours of the 17th of May, with those from England, 
as also the 12th left with you by M. N., for all which h for all 
former kindnesses, I return you my hearty thanks, which is all 
I am able to do. . . . Dear S*", You know my tryalls are considera- 
ble, & did you know my weakness, you would surely pitty & pray 
earnestly for me." He hopes the Lord's purpose is to teach him 
a "Lesson by bringing & keeping me into this Desolate state." 
He finds in the Scriptures, "Good & comfortable words from the 
Lord, or any of his people are very refreshing. But alas, I am 
worthy of neither." Alas, indeed, that these longed-for words are 
so few. He misses Whalley, and at Hartford his horizon is more 
and more obscure. In another letter to Mather he writes, "Dear 
Sir, I Beg the continuance of your Love & fervent prayers, that 


for the good will of him that Dwelt in the Bush, the Blessing may 
yet come upon the head, the top of the head of the poor worm 
that hath been so long seperated from his brethern and allmost 
from all Humain Society." 

After Mrs. Goffe's removal from the Hooke house, a new chan- 
nel for correspondence became necessary. Goffe as "T. D." 
writes in a letter to Mather, Aug. 30, 1678, that as regards Mr. 
Hooke, "that Heavy word has been spoken." He says "My 
Mo : writes that he being dead shee hath written to her Friend (by 
whom I suppose she means yourself) to send her letters to another 
place; but did so far forget herself, as not to inform me either of 
name or place." He encloses a letter to his wife, "which I hum- 
bly entreat you to cover and send away, , . and also that you 
would be pleased to give yourself the trouble of writeing a few 
words to let me know what place & person it is, that my Dear 
Mo: directs to, that I may know for the future how to superscribe 
my letter to her." 

To this reasonable appeal no reply was ever received, and no 
better heed was given later ones. "T. D." writes again Oct. 
23, 1678, "I lately gave you the trouble of a letter, with one 
enclosed to my Dear Mother . . . and hoped to have rec"^ a few 
words from y"". ... I was forced to send that to my Mo: with a 
naked superscription and this also; because I am ignorant both 
of the place & person appoynted (since Mr. H. his death) to direct 
them to. I beseech you sir, to vse your prudenc in the safe con- 
vayance of them, for tho' my letters be of little worth, yet my Dear 
Mo: is pleased to esteem them a comfort to her in this day of her 
great and long continued affliction. ... I should take it as a great 
kindnesse to receive a word or two from you, if you please to 
inclose it to M"" Whiteing. . . It would be a great satisfaction to 
heare that you have rec*^ my letters, and that you know the way 
of sending them to England, & to be instructed by you, how to 

direct them for the future I Beg your fervent prayers, as 

having more need of them than ever. I have been long in the 

April 2, 1679, the anxious and tortured T. D. makes another 
and last appeal to Mather — "I am also greatly longing to heare 
from my poor, Desolat Relations; and whether my last summer's 
letters got safe to them. It was a trouble to me that I was forced 
to send them to yourself so badly directed, and hoped to have 
received a few lines from you concerning it, and how you would 
have me direct them for the future. I Beseech you S"" to pardon my 
giving you this great & long trouble, and let me receive a word or 


two by this Bearer. If I have missed it in anything, vpon the 
least intimation, I shall indeavour to rectify it, or reform for the 
future. Dear Sir, I earnestly Beg the continuance of your fervant 
prayers to the Lord for me & mine, as such as stand in great need 
thereof. I may truly say, I make mention of yourself in particular, 
at least twise or thise in a day before the Lord to whose Grace I 
recomend you & all yours, and remain. Dear Sir, your much 
oblidged and very thankfull friend, T. D. 

I sent you three letters last summer & hope you received them." 

How could the sorrowing husband and father account for the 
seemingly coldhearted refusal of Mather to heed his earnest 
supplications ? How can we explain it ? The keen hunt for 
Goffe was still on. It may be that Mather had heard or suspected 
that the Bull family at Hartford were more defiant than circum- 
spect in regard to "Mr. Cooke," and he feared to trust his signa- 
ture or the secret with them. The last words known to have been 
written by the sad exile are those which close the above letter, 
hoping that his letters to Mather had been received. With no 
assurance that this hope was well founded, without knowing that 
his desolate wife had received a single word from him after her 
removal; repulsed in all attempts to learn even the place of her 
abode; with his narrowing circle of faithful friends in England 
and New England; unable to account for the cutting coldness 
and neglect of the one who was the sole connecting link with his 
native land; helpless to offer comfort to his far-off wife in her 
loneliness; feeling that he should never more see the faces of 
wife and children, although he felt and had said, "This world 
hath indeed nothing in it more Desirable than such faces"; with 
a growing realization or fear of being a heavy, and perhaps un- 
welcome burden; the proud spirit of the old soldier humbled and 
humiliated in a vain attempt to win even the pity of Mather; 
with a price set upon his head and an ever-haunting fear of dis- 
covery, bringing ruin to his protectors. Was it not indeed time 
to die! and we seem to see the once lion heart of the hunted exile 
slowly breaking. 

General Goffe had played his high part before the eyes of 
watching nations. He had been a star of the first magnitude in 
the Lord Protector Cromwell's Councils, and acquitted himself 
bravely and well, as one having the courage of his convictions. 
Words fail to tell of the sadness and pathos of such a close to 
such a life. 

Did Goffe return to die in Hadley ? Shall we attempt to follow 
the fugitive from Hartford in 1680? No blazed path is found, 


but we do find a faint trail leading back to Hadley. What little 
evidence there is points that way. Nothing is found opposing, 
but the case is not proven. So far as we know there had been 
no leak in the secret of Mr. Russell. Goffe had been driven away 
in the stress of war. It would still be a safe retreat and to all 
appearances a natural one. The diary of GofFe and his papers, 
including the letters written to him at Hartford by Tilton and 
Nowell given above, are found among the effects left by Mr. 
John Russell. How did they get there ? Would they not have 
been destroyed as a matter of precaution, had Goffe died else- 
where ? Again, we have the untainted tradition found by Hutch- 
inson at Hadley in 1763, "Two persons unknown were buried 
in the minister's cellar." It was the sum of all knowledge of the 
Judges, which Hutchinson could obtain in Hadley, or the vicinity; 
let that stand for what it is worth. Then there is the general 
probability, that after getting the consent of Mr. Russell he was 
transported back to Hadley; there was time enough for this 
between the opening act and the closing of the Hartford drama. 
It is pleasant, and is it not best, to follow these leadings 
and our wishes so far as to think that the worn wanderer came 
back to breathe out his life on the bosom of faithful John Russell; 
and that he rested at last beside his companion in exile, under the 
sheltering elms of Old Hadley. 


As the author of this History passed away before completing the work, and as it is now 
presented as a posthumous publication, it may not seem amiss, in connection with some 
account of its production, to insert a brief notice of his life. 

Sylvester Judd was born in Westhampton, Mass., April 23, 1789. He was a descendant 
of Dea. Thomas Judd, who came to this country from England, in 1633 or '34, and who re- 
sided the last part of his life in Northampton. His grandfather, Rev. Jonathan Judd, was 
the first minister of Southampton, and, after a ministry of sixty years over the same church, 
died in 1803. His father, Sylvester Judd, settled in Westhampton, in 1774, where he was 
prominent in the affairs of the town, and was a member of the Convention for framing a Con- 
stitution for Massachusetts, in 1779. The mother of Mr. Judd was Hannah Burt, daughter 
of Samuel Burt of Southampton. 

At the age of thirteen, with only such education as the common school in those times 
afforded, he was placed as a clerk in the store owned by his father and Doct. Hooker of 
Westhampton. After remaining there about two years, he went to Boston, where he passed 
not far from six months, a part of the time serving as merchant's clerk. Here he fell in with 
persons of intelligence, whose influence was to stimulate him to an appreciation of knowledge, 
and to a determination to cultivate his own mind, so that his return to his former occupation 
in Westhampton, after leaving Boston, marks an epoch in his mental history. Whatever 
money he could now get was invested in books, and all the leisure moments intervening be- 
tween the calls of customers, were given to their perusal. Yet this ill sufficed to gratify the 
thirst for knowledge that had arisen in his mind, and for many succeeding years, he was in 
the habit of sitting up until twelve, one, and two o'clock, engaged with his books. And here , 
in this little country town, with no stimulus from libraries, reading rooms, or literary com- 
panionship, and with no assistance in his studies, save a little aid he received from the Rev. 
Mr. Hale for about six weeks only, and under all the hindrances from business he had to 
encounter, Mr. Judd mastered the Latin language so far as to read Virgil; learned enough 
of Greek to understand the New Testament in the original; acquired a very thorough knowl- 
edge of French as a written language, and gained some acquaintance of Spanish. He went 
through a full course of the higher mathematics, penetrated deeply into History and Polit- 
ical Economy, and made himself quite extensively acquainted with general literature. Dur- 
ing this time, he exercised himself also in Composition, and contributed some articles to the 
Hampshire Gazette. 

Soon after attaining the age of twenty-one, he formed a partnership in mercantile business 
with Wm. Hooker, Jr. and H. T. Hooker, whose places of business were Norwich, North- 
ampton, and Westhampton, Mr. Judd remaining at the latter place. In January, 181 1, he 
married Apphia Hall, eldest daughter of Aaron Hall of Norwich. In 1813, the above part- 
nership was dissolved, and Mr. Judd carried on the business of the store in which he had 
been employed, by himself, and also engaged, to some extent, in farming operations. But 



his mind being always more bent upon the acquisition of knowledge than the accumulation of 
Property, the matter of dealing with dollars and cents was irksome to him, and from a variety 
of causes, his pecuniary gains were small, and all his business operations proved very dis- 
couraging. The year 1816, he devoted mostly to the gratuitous superintendence of building 
a new meeting-house in Westhampton. In 1817, he was chosen representative to the Gen- 
eral Court, which he attended, contrary to his inclination, as he had a great distaste for pub- 
lic office. 

In March, 1822, Mr. Judd purchased the Hampshire Gazette, one-fourth of which had 
been owned by his deceased brother, Hophni Judd, Esq., and was then in the hands of his 
father. He took up his residence in Northampton, in April of this year. All his energies 
were now concentrated upon making the Gazette, not only an interesting, but an instructive, 
paper. It was far from his idea of a newspaper, that it should be filled with stories, anec- 
dotes, and other matter, fitted only to amuse for the passing moment. He regarded it as 
an educator of the people, and occupied its columns with matter calculated to enlarge the 
boundaries of knowledge, and promote aspirations for further information concerning men 
and things. To enable him to do this, he expended money largely, in proportion to his 
means, in the purchase of books, from which he could furnish abstracts and extracts. The 
whole of the ponderous Edinborough Encyclopsedia, together with numerous books of Travel, 
History, Agricultural works, etc., were thus added to his library. His attention now began 
to turn to the early history of the Connecticut Valley, and he occasionally published leading 
articles upon Northampton, Hadley, and the neighboring towns. He early enlisted the 
paper in behalf of Temperance, and, it is believed, was the first who excluded liquor adver- 
tisements. The Gazette was highly esteemed by exchange papers, and doubled its number 
of subscribers, in his hands. Although, in the main, he had embraced Whig principles, yet, , 
he had nothing of the partisan in his nature, and his mind was ever open to the influx of 
what he believed to be the truth, coming from what quarter it might. In the party strife 
attending the administration of Gen. Jackson as President, he found himself, as editor of 
what had been a Whig paper, in a position so embarrassing as to result in his selling the 
Gazette in 1834. In reference to the subject, he wrote at the time: "The truth is, I have 
become too skeptical in politics to be the conductor of a public press. I have but little con- 
fidence in politics, parties, and politicians. I dislike high whiggism and high Jacksonism, 
and cannot go with either." 

On laying aside his engagements as editor and proprietor of the Hampshire Gazette, Mr. 
Judd felt no inclination for entering into any new active business that offered, although his 
pecuniary resources were very limited. He therefore made up his mind to live on, in a 
humble way, upon such means as he had, thus leaving himself free for such mental occupa- 
tions as he might be drawn to. At the age of seventeen, he had commenced filling manu- 
script volumes with copious abstracts of Chronology, Biography, History, etc., with occa- 
sional entries by way of Private Journal, which had been kept up, with more or less conti- 
nuity, until this time. He now gave himself largely to Miscellaneous Collections, to a minute 
Diary, and to Genealogical, Historical, and Antiquarian Researches, particularly with 
reference to the towns of Hampshire County, but extending also to the whole state of Mass- 
achusetts, and that of Connecticut. As the fruit of these labors, he has left about twenty 
manuscript volumes, entitled "Miscellanies," filled with an immense variety of little known, 
but curious matters, drawn from divers times and divers peoples, and gleaned from a wide 
range of miscellaneous reading. Here are found copious notices of our Indian tribes, vo- 
cabularies of their languages, and facts touching their domestic life; the varied experiences 


of the early settlers of this country; English and Scotch social life and manners, dress, furni- 
ture, etc.; prices of labor and merchandise, at different periods; religious dogmas, conten- 
tions, modes of worship, showing, among other things, the great strife that arose in New 
England, at one time, respecting the use of books of psalms and hymns, instead of getting 
the words for singing by a process known as "deaconing;" the history of woman in regard 
to social position, education, etc.; opinions concerning marriage, divorce, and the relations 
of man to woman generally; snatches of old song and quaint poetry, as well as the higher 
inspirations of the poet. The above citations furnish but a mere hint, as to the multifarious 
and rare matter contained in these volumes. In his Diary of eight or ten volumes, which 
was continued with regularity from 1833 to within a week of his death, besides much that 
serves as auto-biography, and an exponent of his feelings, principles, and opinions, he 
recorded, with scrupulous regard to exactness, the tri-daily state of the thermometer; 
the changes of wind and weather; the different stages of vegetation; the appearance and dis- 
appearance of birds, frogs, and different kinds of insects, their habits, and so forth. There 
are volumes of Collections labeled "Massachusetts" and "Connecticut." As a genealogist, 
it is stated by one well qualified to judge, that he "knew of no one who was his equal in 
New England." His labors in manuscript collections, amount to not far from seventy-five, 
closely filled, volumes. 

In the years 1842 and 1843, Mr. Judd was employed, for some months, by the State of 
Connecticut, in putting in a state of preservation, arranging, and indexing, old and valuable 
State documents. He was made an Honorary Member of the Connecticut and Massachu- 
setts Historical Societies, and of the American Antiquarian Society. In 1856, he published 
a pamphlet, entitled, "Thomas Judd and his Descendants." 

From the early part of his residence in Northampton, Mr. Judd had entertained the idea 
of writing a History of Northampton and the neighboring towns. But, from various causes, 
this was deferred, from year to year, until 1857, when, at the earnest solicitations of persons 
interested in the subject, particularly Maj. Sylvester Smith of Hadley, he commenced the 
present History, with a list of five hundred subscribers. But, his physical strength had now 
become impaired, so that he was subject to many interruptions from ill health, and this, 
added to his extreme caution in endeavoring to verify all his statements, caused the work to 
progress very slowly. Yet he labored on, with an assiduity ill proportioned to his strength, 
and thus cut short his days before his proposed task was done. Paralysis seized upon a 
system, enfeebled by general debility, and accomplished its fatal work in a few days. The 
1 8th of April, i860, witnessed his departure. He had lived within a few days of seventy- 
one years, and his mind had retained its vigor while his bodily powers were enfeebled. He 
I eft a wife and five children. Three had already gone before, among whom was the Rev. 
Sylvester Judd, the author of "Margaret" and some other works. 

He had printed about 430 pages of the 600 promised, and, it is believed, had little more to 
add to the work, except the Genealogical Tables, for which he had extensive materials in 
manuscript. His last conscious efforts of a business kind were expended in trying to send 
some directions to his printers. Immediately after his death, application was made to Hon. 
Lucius M. Boltwood of Amherst, for whose qualifications as a genealogist, it was known 
Mr. Judd had a high respect, to take in charge the finishing of the work, so suddenly bereft 
of the hand that should have carried it to its completion, and, much to the gratification of the 
family of the author, this request was complied with. It is regretted that so long time has 
elapsed in getting the book ready for presentation, but the delays seem to have been una- 
voidable. With all due confidence in him who so kindly consented to take the incomplete 


work in hand, Mr. Judd's own family cannot but experience some pain in giving the work 
to the public, without its final supervision by the author's own, careful hand. 

Did space allow, it would be pleasant to delineate, in full, the personal character of Mr. 
Judd; but a brief summary of salient traits is all that can be attempted. And first, it is 
obvious to remark, that he was eminently a self-made man, having relied very little upon 
others for his knowledge or opinions. He was also a progressive man, never wedded to the 
old, because it had been established by authority in some former period, but ever ready to 
believe that the whole of truth might not yet have been found out, and not frightened lest 
new discoveries should conflict with received opinions. In this spirit, the efforts at reform 
in education and morals met with cordial sympathy from him. While religion, consisting of 
duties to God and man, was always a cardinal element of his being, he was no dogmatist, 
and willingly accorded to all the right of private judgment. A strong sense of justice and 
truth pervaded his whole nature, and led him often to err on the side of right, rather than 
run any hazard on the side of wrong. In business transactions, he was so lenient to creditors 
as to lose much that was justly his due, and in bargains of buying and selling, he was quite 
as careful of the interests of others as of his own. He could hardly be said to have a proper 
estimate of money, even for its uses, and not until compelled by necessity did he reckon 
closely his expenditures. For the present History, in collecting materials for which so large 
a portion of his life was expended, he did not expect to receive, and his family will not realize, 
any return, save the money actually expended in paper, printing and binding. In answer 
to hundreds of letters, asking for information, which he spent years in acquiring, compensa- 
tion was seldom demanded, and not often offered. His memory was exact and strong, and 
his mental powers of application seemed hardly to know a limit. His original physical 
constitution must have been strong, to bear such a life-long draft upon it as was made by his 
habits of study. His eyesight continued unimpaired, long beyond the usual period. He 
was cheerful in temperament, and remarkably genial in social intercourse, being a cherished 
companion for the young, as well as for the more advanced. Although little demonstrative 
in the inner feelings of the heart, his affections were deep and tender as those of woman, 
and the ties existing between him and his family were too strong for death to sever. 

A. H. 


Chapter I 

Early settlements on Connecticut River — Controversies in the church at Hart- 
ford — Decision of the council of 1659 — Difficulties at Wethersfield . I 

Chapter II 

Application to Massachusetts for land — Engagement at Hartford to remove 
to Massachusetts — Committee to lay out a town at Norwottuck; their re- 
turn, not accepted — Proceedings of the first settlers in 1659 and 1660 — 
Settlers on the west side of the river — Courts of Justice — The new town 
named Hadley— Contest with Mr. Bradstreet ..... 10 

Chapter III 

Division of lands in New England — Hadley Homelots and Street — Manner 
of distributing Hadley Intervals — East side and west side Intervals — 
Hatfield Homelots — Measuring Land — Common Fields and Fences — 
Gates ............ 22 

Chapter IV 

Highways — Bridges — Ferries — Grist-mills — Bolting-mills — Saw-mills and 

sawing boards by hand ......... 34 

Chapter V 

First Meeting-house — Bells — Mr. Russell, the first Minister — Salaries of 

Ministers — Hadley Church ........ 42 

Chapter VI 

The Grammar School or Hopkins School — Schools of New England — Gram- 
mar Schools — Free Schools — Instruction of Females — Schools and Schol- 
ars in Hadley — School Houses — School-masters — School Books . . 48 

Chapter VII 

Ordinary-keepers or Inn-keepers — Retailers of wine and liquors — Selling 
liquors to Indians — -Trial of Dr. Westcarr — Drinks in the 17th century — 
Distilling — Aquavitae — Intemperance in New England ... 62 

Chapter VIII 

Town Meetings — Townsmen's Accounts — Freemen — ^Town Officers — Pound 
— Town By-laws — Occupations of the people — Petitions of Hadley, in 
1665, 1669 and 1670 ......... 68 

Chapter IX 
Separation of Hatfield from Hadlev — Proceedings of Hatfield ... 78 



Chapter X 

County of Hampshire — Towns and Churches before 1700 — Courts in Hamp- 
shire — Town marks — Hadley cases in Courts — Presentments for wearing 
silks — Expenses of Courts — Transportation — Sleds — Prices of grain — 
Contributions for Harvard College ...... 85 

Chapter XI. 

Lands in New England before it was settled by the English — Indian Burn- 
ings — Bushes — Burnings by the English — Wood and Timber — Fire-wood 
— Building Timber — Rift Timber — Clapboards — Saw-logs — Pasturing 
domestic animals in the woods ....... 96 

Chapter XII 

Good land of little value to Indians — Purchases by Penn and Pynchon — 
Purchases of the Indians in Norwottuck Valley — Remarks on the Indian 
Deeds — How Hatfield was purchased — How much Hadley paid for land 
— The name Norwottuck ........ 104 

Chapter XIII 

Indians near Connecticut River — The Norwottucks and their Forts — The 
Mohawks and their cruelty and cannibalism — The Mohawks in Hamp- 
shire County — Talks at Albany — Presents to the Mohawks — Entertain- 
ment of Indians — Wampum, or the money of the Indians ... 114 

Chapter XTV 

The Indian War of 1675 ^°*^ '^7^ — Erroneous notions about Philip — Im- 
portance of the Nipmucks — Destruction of Brookfield — Mr. Stoddard's 
account of the attempt to disarm the Norwottucks, and of their escape — 
Fight above Hatfield — Deerfield burnt — Men slain at Northfield — Capt. 
Beers and his party cut off at Northfield — Northfield deserted — Attack 
upon Hadley repelled by the aid of Gen. Goffe — Capt. Lathrop and his 
company slain at Bloody Brook — Deerfield abandoned — Burning of 
Springfield — Attack on Hatfield 127 

Chapter XV 

Indian War of 1675 and 1676 — chiefly 1676 — Fortifications — Indians in the 
winter — War with the Narragansets — Destruction of Lancaster — Mrs. 
Rowlandson taken — Troops march to Miller's River and thence to Hadley 
— Northampton assaulted — Ambuscade near Longmeadow — Three men 
slain at Hockanum — Scheme to bring the five Hampshire towns into two — 
The Falls fight above Deerfield— Attack on Hatfield— Major Talcott 
arrives from Norwich and Quabaug — Hadley assaulted — Expedition of 
Major Talcott and Capt. Henchman up the river — Indians flee to the 
Housatonnuc and are defeated by Major Talcott — War supposed to be 
at an end — Persons killed and captured at Hatfield and Deerfield in 1677 
— Recovery of the captives ........ 151 

Chapter XVI 

Fears on account of the attack upon Hatfield — Hadley fortifications — Num- 
ber of persons slain in Hampshire — Buildings burnt — Benevolence — Cost 
of the war — Headquarters at Mr. Russell's — War taxes in Hampshire — 
Colony expenses in Hampshire — Soldier's wages — Flint locks and match 
locks — Praying Indians — Noises in the air — Garrison at Quabaug — 
— Posts — Hadley Mill, the parley, etc. — Surgeon — Ferrymen and others 
— Scenes in Hadley ......... 179 


Chapter XVII 

Bounds of Hadley and additions — Grant of 1673 — Grant of 1683 — Land at 
the Falls — Grant of 1727 — Survey of 1739 — Controversy with Hatfield, 
1707-1733 — New Houselots — Addition to old Houselots — New Street 
and lots — Grants of land — Skirts of Forty Acres and Hockanum — Fort 
River Pastures — Hadley Swamps ....... 185 

Chapter XVIII 

Coined Money — Taxation in 17th century — Hampshire County rates — War 
rates and charges in Hampshire — Money rates — How rates were paid — 
Grain for taxes — Hadley rates, 1682 and 1687 — Changes in Hadley . 195 

Chapter XIX 

Generals Whalley and Goffe — Hutchinson's Account — President Stiles' His- 
tory — The Russell house and the Judges' chamber .... 206 

Chapter XX 

The Militia and their postures and arms — Hadley militia — Hampshire Troop 
— Change in fire-arms — New Militia Law — New Military book — Bayo- 
nets — Colors — Calling the roll — Watches — Alarms . . . . 215 

Chapter XXI 

Witchcraft in Europe — In New England — In Hampshire County — Mary and 
Hugh Parsons of Springfield — Mary Parsons of Northampton — Death 
of John Stebbins of Northampton — Case of Mary Webster of Hadley — 
The witch mania of 1692 — Various notices relating to Witchcraft . . 224 

Chapter XXII 

The Poor of Hadley — Story of Rebekah Crow — Marriages and Weddings — 
Funerals and Mourning — Hadley Graveyard — Titles — Names — Old 
Style and New Style 233 

Chapter XXIII 

The second Indian War, 1688 to 1698 — Six persons killed at Northfield — 
Presents to the Maquas — Destruction of Schenectady — Troubles with 
Albany Indians — Persons killed at Deerfield and Brookfield — Murder of 
Richard Church of Hadley, and trial and execution of two Indians — 
Attack in Hatfield meadows — Expenses of the war — Pay of soldiers — The 
war in Hampshire — Hampshire soldiers — Taxes — Palisades — Contri- 
butions ........... 248 

Chapter XXIV 

Execution of Sarah Smith and Negro Jack — Sickness of 1689 — Change of 
Government — New Charter, 1692 — Connecticut and Hampshire County — 
Third Indian War began in 1703 — Destruction of Deerfield andPascom- 
muck, and other events in 1704 — Snowshoes — The war from 1705 to 1713 
— Expenses — Taxes — Pay and food of soldiers — Captives — Scalps — 
Dogs — Dutch at Albany — Mohawks ...... 261 

Chapter XXV 

Common lands — Division of Hadley lands now in Amherst — Division of 
Hadley lands now in South Hadley and Granby — The Crank — Highways 
and paths — Division of the Inner Commons in Hadley — Summary of 
Grants and Distributions — Hockanum — Peter Domo . . . 273 


Chapter XXVI 


Equivalent Land — New Towns — Land Speculation — Tar and Turpentine — 
Candlewood — Scarcity of Timber — Floating timber down the Connecti- 
cut — Logs on the meadows — Rafts of boards — Carting by the Falls — 
Hadley Landings — Island between Northampton and Hadley . . 281 

Chapter XXVII 

Paper Money, or Colony bills and Province bills — End of Province bills, 1750 
— Old Tenor — The shad and salmon fishery at Hadley and South Hadley 
— Lampreys — Gatherings at the Falls ...... loi 

Chapter XXVITI. 

Second Meeting-house in Hadley — Sounding-board — Square glass— Seats 
and pews— Seating — Spire — Clock — Weather-cock — Bells — Horse-blocks 
— Stoves — Plan of the lower floor ....... 

Chapter XXIX 

The second, third and fourth Ministers of Hadley — Ordinations — Inscrip- 
tions on the Gravestones of four Ministers — Texts and Sermons — The 
Lord's Supper — Baptisms — Lectures — Whitfield — Minister's wood . 318 


Fourth Indian War, 1722-1726 — Expedition to the West Indies— Fifth War, 
1744-1749 — Sixth War, 1754-1763 — Smallpox — Road to Albany — 
French Neutrals — Pirates ........ 331 


Noxious Beasts and Birds — Wolves — Wildcats — Bears — Catamounts, Crows 
and Blackbirds — Woodchucks — Furred Animals and the Fur Trade — 
Beavers — Raccoons — Muskrats — Deer and Deer Hunting — Venison — 
Deerskin Garments — Wild Turkeys — Pigeons — Rattlesnakes . . 344 

Chapter XXXII 

Husbandry — Wheat, Peas, Rye, Meslin, Barley, Oats, Beans, Buckwheat, 
Indian Corn, Potatoes, Turnips, Pumpkins, Flax, Hemp, Broom Corn, 
and Brooms — Hay Grasses, native and foreign — Cider and Apples — 
Apple Molasses — Beer — Gardens ....... 353 

Chapter XXXIII 

Domestic Animals, etc. — Horses, Oxen — Fat Cattle — Butchers — Cows — 
Swine — Pork and Bacon — Puddings and Sausages — Sheep and Wool and 
trade to Newport — Domestic Fowls— Geese — Bees and Honey — Tobacco 
— Butter and Cheese — Flaxseed and Oil — Berries — Nuts — -Maple Sugar 
— Soap — Lights — Timepieces — Blue Dyeing — Cotton — Rags — Sleighs- 
Carriages — Wagon to and from Boston — Time of Planting, Harvesting, 
etc. — Statistics of four Towns, 1771 ...... 367 

Chapter XXXIV 

South Hadley — First Settlement — First Meeting-bouse and Minister— Mr. 
Rawson forcibly ejected from the pulpit — Mr. Woodbridge settled — Con- 
test about the second Meeting-house; one end cut down — The Parish 
divided — The First Parish — Tiie Common — Schools — The Poor — Inn- 
keepers and Retailers — The Revolutionary War — The Canal and Visitors 
— The Second Parish and Granby — Various matters . . . 387 


Chapter XXXV 

The Third Precinct, or East Hadley — First Meeting-house and Minister — 
Church Members — Minister's Wood — Deacons — Second Minister — East 
Parish— District of Amherst — Representatives and Justices — Plan to 
divide Amherst — The Revolution— Tories — Taxes — Minute-men — Del- 
egates and Representatives— Schools — The Poor — Innkeepers, etc. — 
Highways — Flat Hills — Physicians — Planters and householders — Insur- 
rection — School dames . ........ 

Chapter XXXVI 

Hadley Broad Street — ^Wearing of the banks by the river — New North Lane 
— Injury to Hadley by the river — Floods — Middle Street — Sidewalks — 
Shade Trees — Inhabitants in 1770 — North Hadley — Trees of Hadley — 
Mount Holyoke — Logs and Boards— Fences^Clearing Land . . 419 


Genealogies of Hadley Families, embracing the Early Settlers of the towns 
of Hatfield, South Hadley, Amherst and Granby 



Sylvester Judd ..... 

Perils of our Forefathers 

The Churchyard, Hadley, England 

Table Stones in the Meadow Cemetery 

The Downlook on the Town from Mt. Holyoke 

The Birthplace of Bishop Huntington , 

The Birthplace of General Joseph Hooker 

The Russell Church and Hotel 

The Old Academy Building 

The Old First Church, Middle Street . 

The Famous Old Town Street 

Page I 
Page 1 06 
Page 106 
Page 150 
Page 184 
Page 184 
Page 206 
Page 206 
Page 310 
Page 418 




Early settlements on Connecticut River — Controversies in the church at Hartford — Decis- 
ion of the council of 1659 — DifEcuIties at Wethersfield. 

The first English settlement in New England was made at 
Plymouth in 1620. This was the beginning of the Plymouth 
Colony, which was united to Massachusetts in 1692. The old- 
est town in the colony of Massachusetts is Salem, which was 
planted in 1628. Charlestown was begun in 1629, and the foun- 
dations of Boston, Dorchester, Roxbury and Watertown were lain 
in 1630, and a beginning w^as made at Cambridge in 1631. In a 
few years, many towns were planted in Massachusetts. 

Previous to the settlement at Plymouth, some Dutch traders 
visited Hudson's River and Long Island Sound, and in 1614, they 
built a small fort on the island of Manhattan, now New York, and 
in the next year, began a settlement near Albany. These Dutch 
adventurers discovered Connecticut River, which they named 
Fresh River, and in 1614, Adrian Block sailed up the river as far 
as Windsor. A commercial intercourse began between the Dutch 
and the Plymouth colonists in 1627. The Dutch gave the Ply- 
mouth people intimations respecting the fertile lands upon Con- 
necticut River. 

The Indians on Connecticut River were harassed and terrified 
by the more powerful Pequots; and some of their sachems and 
others who had been driven out, made a journey to Plymouth and 
Boston in 1631, and urgently solicited the English to form a settle- 
ment on the river, but the English governors declined the invita- 
tion. The Plymouth colonists, whose vessels had visited the 
river, determined in 1633 to build a trading house there. They 
were anticipated by the Dutch, who, in 1633, built a light fort near 
the mouth of Little River in Hartford, having purchased some 



land of the conquering Pequots in June of that year. They in- 
tended to exclude the English from the Connecticut. But in 
October, 1633, WilHam Holmes of Plymouth, ascended the river, 
with the materials for a house on board his vessel, and disregard- 
ing the menaces of the Dutch, he passed by their fort, and erected 
a trading house a little below^ the mouth of Windsor River, on a 
meadow^ that still bears the name of Plymouth Meadow. Holmes 
carried to the Connecticut some of the sachems, whom the Pequots 
had driven out. 

In September, 1633, John Oldham and three others went over- 
land to Connecticut River, to trade. These were doubtless the 
first Europeans, that passed by land from the seacoast of Massa- 
chusetts, to Connecticut River. In November, 1633, Samuel 
Hall and two others travelled through the woods to the river, and 
returned in January. In 1634, men were sent from "the towns 
in the Bay," to examine the country on the river. Those who 
took a view of the borders of the Connecticut, found fine lands 
and good situations for plantations, and their accounts of the fer- 
tility of the soil were spread among the people; and many of the 
planters in the towns around Boston, and some new-comers, 
resolved to take possession of these desirable places. In 1635, 
some of the Watertown people began a plantation at Wethersfield; 
those from Cambridge (then called Newtown) settled at Hart- 
ford, and those from Dorchester at Windsor. In October, about 
60 men, women and children from Dorchester, with their horses, 
cattle and swine, were 14 days in removing through the wilder- 
ness to Windsor. The ensuing winter was unusually severe, and 
the privations and suflferings of the inhabitants were extreme. 
The country about Springfield was examined in 1635, but 
William Pynchon and his small company from Roxbury did not 
establish themselves there until May, 1636. In June, 1636, Mr. 
Hooker, Mr. Stone and about 100 men, women and children, with 
160 cattle, traversed the forests from Cambridge to Hartford. 
They left Cambridge on the last day of May. 

The war with the Pequots occurred in 1637, and resulted in the 
destruction of many of that tribe, and in the subjection of the rest. 

The inhabitants of the new towns soon recovered from the dis- 
tresses attending their first settlement, and from the effects of the 
Indian war, and many years of prosperity and happiness suc- 
ceeded. They were industrious and frugal and their lands were 
productive. As early as December, 1644, the General Court 
were endeavoring to find a market for their surplus produce. 
They say, "Massachusetts and Plymouth complain of our over- 


filling their markets." They built good houses and barns, made 
additions to their furniture and implements, and multiplied their 
conveniences and enjoyments. 

The first emigrants to Connecticut River, knowing that their 
productions must be sent to market by the river, and their supplies 
be received from abroad through the same channel, selected 
places where the river was navigable. Even Mr. Pynchon and 
his associates did not plant themselves above boat navigation. 
But the great Falls above Springfield, now at South Hadley, were 
an obstacle sufficient to prevent any settlement north of them for 
many years. At length, in May, 1653, seventeen years after 
Springfield was begun, a number of men residing at Windsor, 
Hartford and other places, petitioned the General Court to grant 
them a plantation at Nonotuck, above Springfield; and their 
petition was aided by three of the principal men in Springfield, 
who were very desirous of having neighbors in the colony to 
which they belonged. The General Court in the same month 
appointed three men of Springfield, John Pynchon, Elizur Hol- 
yoke and Samuel Chapin, to divide the land into two plantations, 
and the petitioners were to have one of them. In 1654, the Com- 
mittee reported to the General Court, that they had laid out the 
bounds of one plantation, on the west side of the river, extending 
"from the little meadow called Capawonk or Mattaomet, down 
to the head of the falls;" reserving the lands on the east side of 
the river for another plantation. The Indian title was purchased 
by John Pynchon for the planters, Sept. 24, 1653. The settle- 
ment of Northampton began in 1654. The planters purchased 
Capawonk meadow (now in Hatfield) of the Indian owner in 
1657, this tract not being included in the purchase made in 1653. 
Hadley, the second plantation in the valley of Nonotuck, or Nor- 
wotuck, was commenced in 1659, five years later than North- 

Differences in the churches at Hartford and Wethersfield were 
the principal cause of the settlement of Hadley in 1659; but if 
these disputes had not occurred, such desirable tracts of interval 
would not long have remained without cultivators. The church 
at Hartford was one of the largest and most eminent in New Eng- 

♦Hubbard says the differences in the churches in the years 1656, 1657 and 1658, "ended 
in the removal of one part of the churches and towns of Hartford, Wethersfield and Windsor 
to another plantation or two up higher, upon Connecticut River, the one of which was called 
Hadley, and the other Northampton." These partial errors of Hubbard are copied by 
Holmes, who fixes the settlement of both towns in 1658, which is not correct in regard to 
either. Religious differences had no concern in the first planting of Northampton. 


land, and the two ministers, Mr. Thomas Hooker and Mr. Samuel 
Stone, though unlike in some respects, were both great and good 
men, whose praise was in all the churches. Mr. Hooker was 
firm and decided, yet prudent and conciliatory, and there was no 
serious trouble or discord in the church while he lived. In a few 
years after his death, which happened July 7, 1647, ^ contention 
arose, having Mr. Stone and a majority of the church on one side, 
and a strong minority on the other. Several on each side, were 
men of distinction in the town and colony. The origin of the 
difficulty has not been clearly stated by any writer. Hubbard 
alludes to different opinions concerning the extension of the priv- 
ileges of those not church-members; and says, "the first appear- 
ance of disturbance which on that account happened among 
them, was occasioned on a call of a person to supply the place of 
Mr. Hooker." He does not tell when this occurred, nor who was 
the person to whom a call was given. In another place, he says, 
the differences at first were "about the enlarging of baptism and 
such like accounts." Mather says, the misunderstanding began 
between Mr. Stone and the ruling elder, (William Goodwin,) 
but its origin was obscure. Trumbull supposes, "that some 
member had been admitted, or baptism administered, which 
Elder Goodwin conceived to be inconsistent with the rights of 
the brotherhood and the strict principles of the Congregational 

The minority were attached to the Congregational way of church 
order as professed and practiced under Mr. Hooker; they seemed 
to adhere to the Cambridge Platform, and were opposed to all 
important changes. They were sometimes called "strict Con- 
gregationalists." On the other hand, Mr. Stone was endeavoring 
to introduce some new practices into the church; to effect some 
innovations that were displeasing to the minority; and he seems 
to have been sustained by a majority of the church. Trumbull 
is of opinion that his changes related to three subjects, and that 
the whole controversy respected them, viz., the qualifications for 
baptism, church membership, and the rights of the brotherhood. 
These three points require some explanation. 

I. Baptism. Hitherto, only the members of churches in full 
communion, had their children baptized. Now, many ministers 
and others desired to enlarge the subjects of baptism, and a coun- 
cil or synod from Massachusetts and Connecticut met at Boston 
in June, 1657. and decided that baptism might be extended to 
the children of such baptized parents as were not scandalous, and 
would own the covenant, though not members of the church in 


full communion. Mr. Stone was one of this council, and is sup- 
posed to have advocated the introduction of this new measure, 
this "half-way covenant," as it was subsequently called. Another 
synod met in Boston in 1662 and recommended the same practice. 
This alteration met with much opposition in both colonies, and 
was but slowly introduced.* 

2. Church membership. From the first settlement of New 
England, only those who gave some evidence of their faith and 
repentance, were admitted to communion by the churches. There 
were individuals, perhaps many, who desired to have all admit- 
ted to the Lord's Supper who had competent knowledge, and 
whose conduct was not immoral, though not professing to be re- 
generate. No evidence has been adduced to show that Mr. 
Stone, or any other minister, or the majority of any church, at 
the time of the Hartford contentions, were in favor of such a lat- 
itude in admitting members to communion. The council at Bos- 
ton in 1657, which approved of "owning the covenant," was de- 
cisive against receiving any to full communion, except those who 
manifested faith and repentance. It may be doubted whether 
Mr. Stone differed much from Elder Goodwin and the minority 
on the question of full church membership. 

3. The rights of the brotherhood. Trumbull says, "Mr. 
Stone's ideas of Congregationalism appear to have bordered more 
on Presbyterianism, and less on independence, than those of the 
first ministers in the country in general." These ideas of Mr. 
Stone, with actions in some degree corresponding, will account 
for much of the controversy at Hartford. He was probably 
considered by the minority as claiming too much power, and 
encroaching upon the rights of the brethren."]" 

The papers containing the chief points upon which the parties 
differed, their grievances and complaints, and the decisions of 
the councils that were called to compose their differences, have 
not been preserved, except the account of the proceedings of the 

*Trumbull is mistaken in supposing that "owning the covenant" was not practiced in 
Connecticut until 1696. There is an old record in Windsor, relating to church matters, 
which states that Mr. Warham first began this practice, January 31, 1657-8, and continued 
it until March 19, 1664-5, when ^^ forbore, owing to scruples of conscience. Mr. Chaun- 
cey "set it on again," June 21, 1668, the church assenting to it. 

■fin 1670, the second church in Hartford was formed by "strict Congregationalists" who 
had been members of the first church. Their sentiments were apparently similar to those 
of the planters of Hadley. They complained of opposition by preaching and practice to 
the Congregational way. This is now the South Church in Hartford. The first church is 
that under the pastoral care of Rev. Dr. Hawes. 


last council in 1659. Indeed, the progress of the controversy is 
nearly as obscure as its origin. 

Councils from the neighboring churches convened about 1654 
and 1655, to reconcile the parties, but without effect. In June, 
1656, a council from the churches about Boston met at Hartford 
and gave their advice. The aggrieved minority seemed willing 
to comply, but the church did not submit to the advice given. 
The same council from Massachusetts was again invited to Hart- 
ford, and they went the latter part of April, 1657, and succeeded 
in effecting an agreement which was called a "Pacification," on 
the 3d of May. For reasons which do not appear, there soon 
followed what was called a relapse — a breach of the pacification, 
and each party accused the other of violating it. The parties be- 
came more embittered and alienated than before. Mr. Stone and 
the church undertook to deal with some of the principal men in 
the minority, viz., Governor Webster Andrew Bacon and William 
Lewis. After this, the minority formally withdrew from the 
church, and were about forming a union with the church at 
Wethersfield under Mr. John Russell. This withdrawal appears 
to have taken place in the latter part of 1657 or in the early part 
of 1658. Mr. Stone and the church were proceeding with the 
withdrawers in a course of discipline, when the General Court 
interfered, in March, 1658, and prohibited the church from pro- 
ceeding, and forbid the withdrawers to prosecute their object. 

It was apparently in the early part of 1658, that the minority 
of the church began to think seriously of removing to the colony 
of Massachusetts. They sent men up the river to view the lands 
east and north of Northampton. Others applied to the General 
Court of Massachusetts for a grant of land; they were favorably 
received, and obtained what they desired. In the spring of 1659, 
an agreement was formed, and it was determined to begin the 
plantation that season. In their grant from Massachusetts was 
a condition, that they should submit to an orderly hearing of the 
differences between themselves and their brethren. 

The former council from Massachusetts, with an addition 
from tvv^o more churches, were invited to meet at Hartford on the 
19th of August, 1659. The church at Dorchester declined send- 
ing their minister, Mr. Richard Mather, "in regard to his age 
and the difficulties of the journey," but intimated that they would 
afford their help if the meeting were somewhere in the Bay. It 
was finally agreed that the council should meet in Boston, on the 
26th of September. They heard the grievances, blamed both 
parties, and proposed terms of reconciliation, which were accepted. 


After this, the churches of Hartford and Hadley held communion 
with each other. Their grievances presented to this council had 
all happened since the pacification of May, 1657; there was no 
allusion to the earlier subjects of controversy.* 

The General Court of Connecticut, in appointing the annual 
Thanksgiving in November, 1659, mention as one reason for 
thanks, "the success of the endeavors of the reverend elders of 
the last council, for composing the sad differences at Hartford." 

This reconciliation caused much joy in many churches. On 
the 23d of October, 1654, Mr. Mather recited to the church in 
Dorchester, the determination of the council, "and the loving 
acceptance thereof by both parties, with their readiness to make 
confession of the failings of each to the other, for which we ought 
to give God the praise. "f 

The Council of 1659. The result of this council is among the 
papers of the Massachusetts Historical Society. It is a long doc- 
ument, and not easily read. What follows is only an abstract, 
containing the substance of the decision. 

"A Council held at Boston, Sept. 26, 1659, concerning the long, sad, and afflicting contro- 
versy between the Rev. Teacher, Mr. Samuel Stone, and the brethren of the church at Hart- 
ford, on one part, and the brethren, the withdrawers from said church, on the other part, 
since the relapse, after the pacification of May, 3 1657." 

Six Grievances presented by the withdrawing brethren and answers of the council. 

1. Mr. Stone's non-administration of the sacrament. 
Council. They think Mr. Stone's conduct irregular. 

2. His sending for a dismission. 

Council. His desire of dismission, so soon after consenting to the pacification, was un- 

3. His propositions. 

Council. His proposals of engagements to the church at such a time, were unseasonable 
and inexpedient. 

4. Rigid handling of divers brethren. 

Council. The dealing with honored Mr. Webster was unnecessary and should have been 
spared. The dealing with brother Bacon for his first speech was of the hardest. His sec- 
ond speech was more censurable, but might have been passed with a rebuke. We dare not 
censure the proceedings in brother Lewis's case, as rigid. 

5. Mr. Stone's nullifying the instrument of pacification. 

Council. Mr. Stone's expressions, candidly interpreted, did not nullify the pacification. 

*Trumbu!l supposes that three councils from Massachusetts met at Hartford, viz., one in 
1656, one June 3, 1659, and one Aug. 19, 1659; he omits the council that made the pacifica- 
tion in May, 1657, or perhaps he transfers its transactions to the supposed council of June 3, 
1659. There was no council at Hartford, Aug. 19, 1659, but there was one at Boston, Sept. 
26, 1659, whose proceedings in which are mentioned the other councils, Trumbull had not 
seen. These proceedings make no allusion to a council in June, 1659. 

fDorchester church records. 


6. "Concerning the church's separating carriages, not taking congnizance of our com- 
plaints, and owning Mr. Stone in his offensive practices." 

Council. Affairs seem not to have been managed with such impartiality, and encourage- 
ment of the dissenters, as the state of things required. When Mr. Stone was blameworthy, 
the brethren who upheld him, were blameworthy. 

Breach of pacification is the principal point. Mr. Stone was guilty of actions which 
tended to unsettle the pacification, but not guilty of a breach of it. 

Six Grievances presented by Mr. Stone and the brethren of the church, and answers of 
the council. 

I. The withdrawers offered violence to the pacification. 
Council. They did break it by their actual withdrawing. 

2 and 3. The withdrawers transgressed in separating in a schismatical way, and their 
sin is scandalous. 

Council. The separation of the withdrawers was irregular, as there was no just cause for 
separation; and if there had been, council might have been had, and the dismission been 
orderly. Though their act was irregular, yet we look not on them as schismatics, because 
they were led thereto by a mistake concerning the act of the council of 1656. They have 
all along desired a council. 

4. The withdrawers are still members of the church at Hartford. 
Council. We admit that they are still members. 

5. The withdrawers transgressed in publishing their papers. 

Council. The offensive or accusatory part, we judge to be irregular, in respect to exact 
verity, and in respect to order. 

6. Their joining another church. 

Council. They cannot be members of two churches at once. We bear witness against 
such of the withdrawers as have joined another church, as being irregular. 

We desire that in case of mutual satisfaction given and taken, between all parties, that 
then there might be a returning of the dissenters into communion with the Hartford church. 
But if any of them, after satisfaction, shall choose to dispose of themselves elsewhere, and to 
remove their habitations, then our advice is that the church give them dismission on their 
request, and that such as have joined another church, do renew their covenant. We expect 
they will hold communion with the church at Hartford, and the church with them. 

The council closed with strong exhortations to the parties; and mentioned the great labor 
of the council at Hartford in 1656; the services of the messengers from Massachusetts, and 
the pacification of May 3d, 1657, and the relapse; and the labors of the present assembly. 

Signed at Boston, Oct. 7, 1659, by 14 ministers, viz., John Wilson, Charles Chauncey, 
Richard Mather, John Allin, Zech. Symmes, John Norton, John Eliot, Edm. Browne, Thos. 
Cobbet, John Sherman, William Hubbard, Samuel Danforth, Jonathan Mitchell, Thos. 
Shepard; and 3 delegates, viz., Richard Russel, Edward Tyng, Isaac Heath. 

Wethersfield experienced various vicissitudes, and most of the 
early settlers removed to other towns, and their places were sup- 
plied by new comers. After a few years, the inhabitants became 
more stable and prosperous, and the village contained many in- 
telligent and thriving men. Mr. Henry Smith, their minister, 
died in 1648, after preaching there eight or ten years. Mr. John 
Russell succeeded him in 1649. ^^ ^"^ ^ number of the church 
entertained opinions in unison with those of the minority at Hart- 
ford, while others seemed to sympathize with the majority. There 
was some difficulty at Wethersfield in 1658, and a complaint was 
presented to the General Court against Mr. Russell in August. 


A few months after this, Lieut. John Hollister* was excommuni- 
cated by the church. In March, 1659, he complained that the 
charges against him had not been presented to him. The Gen- 
eral Court required Mr. Russell and the church to deliver to him 
a copy of the charges; and they desired the church to consider the 
matter and conclude upon some way to issue their sad differences. 

The town voted, December, 1658, that they had no settled min- 
ister among them; and on the 24th of March, 1659, they chose a 
committee "to procure a solid and approved minister." The 
committee were to consult Governor Wells, who resided in Weth- 
ersfield, and Mr. Stone of Hartford. On the 2d of May, 1659, 
the town chose another committee to engage a minister, prefacing 
the vote with these words: — "seeing it is commonly reported that 
Mr. Russell hath sent for his church to Norwottuck, to do some 
church act, whereby the town is wholly destitute." In June, 
1659, the General Court judged it to be the duty of the inhabitants 
of Wethersfield to provide a minister. 

It appears from these proceedings that Mr. Russell preached 
in Wethersfield until some time in April, 1659, though the town 
voted that they had no settled minister, some months previous. 
A majority of the town were opposed to him, but a majority of the 
church seem to have adhered to him. In October, 1659, the Gen- 
eral Court, referring to the long and tedious differences and 
troubles betwixt Mr. Russell and several members of Wethers- 
field church, particularly betwixt Mr. Russell and the lieutenant, 
desired the churches of Hartford and Windsor to send messengers 
to Wethersfield to give advice and counsel. "And the whole 
church belonging to Mr. Russell's charge, lately of Wethersfield, 
is to be acquainted herewith." The meeting was to be on the 
first Tuesday in November. The result of this council is not 
known. In March, 1661, the General Court remarked that di- 
vers members of the church at Wethersfield had removed from 
thence without notice to, or allowance from the court, magistrates 
or churches of that colony; those still remaining there were de- 
clared by the court to be the true and acknowledged church at 

It may be concluded from expressions in the records and other 
circumstances, that a majority of the Wethersfield church-mem- 
bers settled at Norwottuck with Mr. Russell. The church was 

*John Hollister, usually called "the lieutenant," was an influential man in Wethersfield. 
His daughter Sarah married Rev. Hope Atherton, the first minister of Hatfield; and after 
his death, she married Timothy Baker of Northampton. 


not large. Goodwin, in his Foote Genealogy, states that early 
in the spring of 1659, all the members of the church, except six, 
voted for a removal. The General Court of Massachusetts, so 
careful to have the Hartford men separate from the church in an 
orderly manner, never suggested that there w^as any irregularity 
in the conduct of the Wethersfield members who settled in Hadley, 

Farmer's Genealogical Register says Mr. Russell was installed 
in Hadley. The correctness of this remark may be doubted. It 
is believed that the "church act" at Hadley, whatever it may have 
been, was not an act in which the aid or concurrence of any other 
church was sought. When a minister and a majority of his church 
changed their residence, no installing act was deemed necessary. 

Disputes in the church at Hartford and elsewhere continued 
long after Hadley was settled, but became less vehement. Mr. 
Bradstreet of New London, in his Journal in 1667, mentions that 
a synod was called at Hartford, to discuss some points concerning 
baptism and church discipline, and he expressly names the two 
parties, Congregational and Presbyterian. The Saybrook Plat- 
form of 1708 seems to have been the result of a compromise be- 
tween similar parties. 


Application to Massachusetts for land — Engagement at Hartford to remove to Massachu- 
setts — Committee to lay out a town at Norwottuck; their return, not accepted — Proceed- 
ings of the first settlers in 1659 and 1660 — Settlers on the west side of the river — Courts 
of Justice — The new town named Hadley — Contest with Mr. Bradstreet. 

Capt. John CuUick and Elder William Goodwin, two promi- 
nent men among the withdrawers, (as they were then denomi- 
nated,) went to Boston and presented the following petition to 
the General Court, May 20, 1658: 

"Whereas your most humble servants, the subscribers, v/ith several others of the colony 
of Connecticut, do conceive that it may be most for the comfort of them and theirs to remove 
themselves and families from thence, and to come under your pious and godly government, 
if the Lord shall please so to order it, and yourselves to accept it. We do presume to pre- 
sent this our humble motion to your wisdom's consideration, whether we may, without 
offence, view any tract of land unpossessed within your colony, in order to such an end, and 
in case v/e can present any thing that may be to the encouraging of a considerable company 
to take up a plantation, either at Nonotuck or elsewhere, we may have your gracious allow- 
ante to dispose ourselves there; or in case that be not, then within any of your settled plan- 
tations, as the wise God shall direct us and show unto us; we being first of you, presume to 
tender ourselves first to you, which if you shall please to grant, we hope through the grace of 



Christ, our conversations among you shall be without offence; so committing you and all 
your weighty affairs to the guidance and blessing of the Lord, we rest, 

yours in all due observance, 
Boston, zoth, 3d, 1658. JOHN CULLICK, 

[May 20, 1658.] WILL. GOODWIN." 

Their request was granted in the following terms: — 

"In answer to the petition of Capt. Cullick and Mr. Wm. Goodwin, in behalf of them- 
selves and others, the Court judgeth meet to grant their request, in reference to lands not 
already granted, and further gives them liberty to inhabit in any part of our jurisdiction 
already planted, provided they submit themselves to a due and orderly hearing of the differ- 
ences between themselves and their brethren." 

Consented to by both Magistrates and Deputies, May 25, 1658. 

In the same year, 1658, some of the withdrawers desired prop- 
ositions from Northampton in regard to Capawonk meadow, 
which belonged to that town. In October, 1658, the town of 
Northampton voted to "give away" Capawonk, on four condi- 
tions: — 1st. The Hartford men are to settle two plantations; one 
on each side of the river. 2d. They are to maintain a sufficient 
fence against hogs and cattle. 3d. They are to pay 10 pounds, 
in wheat and peas. 4th. They are to inhabit here by next May. 

The Agreement or Engagement of those who intended to re- 
move from Connecticut to Massachusetts, is dated at Hartford, 
April 18, 1659, and is recorded on the first book of Hadley records. 
The following is a copy of that Agreement and of some proceed- 
ings of a later date recorded with the other: 

"At a meeting at Goodman Ward's house, in Hartford, April i8th, 1659, the company 
there met engaged themselves under their own hands, or by their deputies, whom they had 
chosen, to remove themselves and their families out of the jurisdiction of Connecticut into 
the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts, as may appear in a paper dated the day and year 
abovesaid. The names of the engagers are these: — 

John Webster 
William Goodwin 
John Crow 
Nathaniel Ward 
John White 
John Barnard 
Andrew Bacon 
William Lewis 
William Westwood 
Richard Goodman 
John Arnold* 
William Partrigg 
Gregory Wilterton* 
Thomas Standley 
Samuel Porter 
Richard Church 
Ozias Goodwin* 
Francis Barnard 
James Ensign* 
George Steele* 

John Marsh 
Robert Webster* 
William Lewis Jr.* 
Nathaniel Standley 
Samuel Church 
William Markum 
•/ Samuel Moody 
Zechariah Field 
Widow Westly* 
Widow Watson* 
Andrew Warner 
Mr. John Russell Junior 
Nathaniel Dickinson 
Samuel Smith 
Thomas Coleman 
John Russell, senior 
John Dickinson 
Philip Smith 
John Coleman 
Thomas Wells 

James Northam 
Samuel Gardner 
Thomas Edwards* 
John Hubbard 
Thomas Dickinson 
Robert Boltwood 
Samuel Smith Jr* 
William Gull 
Luke Hitchcock* 
Richard Montague 
John Latimer* 
Peter Tilton 
John Hawkes 
Richard Billings 
Benj. Harbert* 
Edward Benton* 
John Catling* 
Mr. Samuel Hooker* 
Capt. John Cullick* 

not fully engaged 
Daniel Warner 


1st. We whose names are above written do engage ourselves mutually one to another, 
that we will, if God permit, transplant ourselves and families to the plantation purchased, 
on the east side of the river of Connecticut, beside Northampton, therein to inhabit and 
dwell by the 29th of September come twelve months, which will be in the year 1660. [Mean- 
ing Sept. 29th, 1660.] 

2d. That each of us shall pay the charges of the land purchased according to his pro- 
portion, as also for the purchase of Hockanum. 

3d. That we will raise all common charges, of what sort soever, for the present, upon 
the land that men take up: mow, plow land and house lot, according to the proportion of 
land that each man takes of all sorts; and all charges shall be paid as they shall arise and be 
due, from the date hereof. 

4th. That if any persons so engaging be not inhabiting there by the time aforesaid, then, 
notwithstanding their payment of charges, their lands and what is laid out in rates shall 
return to the town: and yet this article doth not free men from their promise of going and 

5th. That no man shall have liberty to sell any of his land till he shall inhabit and dwell in 
the town three years; and also to sell it to no person, but such as the town shall approve on. 

Agreed that all those persons that will go up within three weeks shall give in their names 
by this day fortnight, and then those that are so agreed shall take up a quarter together, 
and so those that follow shall take up another quarter, so they do it together, or so far as 
their numbers run. 

Agreed also that no persons shall fell any trees upon any lot of ground lotted out, or to be 
lotted out, but upon his own ground or lot, or against his own lot within ten rods of the same 
in the highway. The land to be lotted is either what is for the homelots, or between the 
homelots and the meadow. 

It is agreed also by the said company, upon the 25th of April, 1659, that they will purchase 
the lands on the west side of the great river, above Napanset, if it can be bought, and that 
each of the said engagers will pay their several proportions to the said purchase, according 
to what they have put in to take up lands by, at the time of their said engagement: witness 
their hands, dated April the i8th 1659. 

At the said meeting William Westwood, Richard Goodman, William Lewis, John White 
and Nathaniel Dickinson were chosen by the whole company, to go up to the foresaid plan- 
tation, on the east side of Northampton, and to lay out the number 59 homelots, and to allow 
eight acres for every homelot, and to leave a street 20 rods broad betwixt the two wester- 
most rows of homelots; and to divide the said rows of homelots into quarters by highways. 
Those men, being willing to answer the desire of the said company, did undertake the work. 
They desiring to make some beginning there for themselves, the company granted them lib- 
erty, according to a former agreement, that they might choose in any of the quarters to lay 
out their own homelots, provided they took them together at one side of any of the said 

The plantation being begun by them and some other of the engagers, the rest of the en- 
gagers that remained at Hartford and Wethersfield, with those that were come up to inhabit 
at the said plantation, did upon the ninth of November (1659) at Hartford, and about the 
said time at Wethersfield, and at the said plantation, choose by vote, William Westwood, 
Nathaniel Dickinson, Samuel Smith, Thomas Standley, John White, Richard Goodman, 
and Nathaniel Ward, to order all public occasions, that concern the good of that plantation 
for the year ensuing. 

The said Townsmen made a rate upon the 22d of November, 1659, for the paying of the 
purchase of the said plantation, and for the minister's maintenance, levying it at 50 shillings 
the 100 pounds, which in the whole sum came to 180 pounds; for the speedy gathering of 
this rate, we sent the rate down to the two towns Hartford and Wethersfield, that the charges 
might be truly paid and satisfied, by every man according to his engagement, as is visible 
in the engagement itself, that is dated the i8th of April 1659." 

There are 59 names to the Agreement, and one not fully engaged. 
Of these, 31 first named, from John Webster to Andrew Warner, 
inclusive, belonged to Hartford, except Samuel Porter, who was 


from Windsor, but may have resided in Hartford in 1659. The 
next 20, from Mr. John Russell, Jr. to John Latimer, inclusive, 
belonged to Wetherslield; the next tw^o, Peter Tilton and John 
Hawks, were of Windsor, and 5 or 6 of the 7 below Hawks, were 
of Hartford. Those with this mark, * 18 in number, did not 
remove to Hadley, or remained there but a short time. 

The General Court, on the 28th of May, 1659, appointed a 
committee of five, viz., three from Springfield and two from 
Northampton, to lay out the bounds of a town, according to the 
grant made May 25, 1658. The order follows, copied from the 
printed records of the Colony, and retaining the orignial orthog- 
raphy, except a few contractions. 

"Whereas it hath appeared to this Court, that according to a former graunt to Capt. 
John Cullicke £? Mr Willjam Goodwyn, in behalfe of themselves and ffreinds that desired 
to remoove into our colony, they haue begunne to remoove to Norwoottucke with seuerall 
familjes, and made some begining on the east side the riuer in order to a plantacion, and 
that there are many desirable persons hauing a pastor with his church engaged to goe along 
with them, with another who may in tjme be joyned to that church for theire further helpe 
in the worke of the ministry, whereby they are enabled not only to carry on a toune, but 
church worke also, — this Court, being willing to remoove all obstacles out of theire way, and 
finding the people so many and considerable that haue engaged, with seuerall others that 
would engage if there might be encouragement found there for them, doe order, that these 
persons ffollowing, viz., Capt. Pinchon, Left. Holyhoke, Deacon Chapin, Willjam Holton, 
and Richard Lyman, shall be a committee fully impowered by this Court to lay out the 
bounds of the toune at Norwottocke, on either or both sides the riuer as they shall see cause, 
so as shall be most suitable for the chohabitation and full supply of those people, that this 
wildernes may be populated and the majne ends of our coming into these parts may be pro- 
moted. Voted by the whole Court mett together. 28, 3, 1659." 

The preamble of the order shows clearly that the Court deemed 
these emigrants from Connecticut to be estimable men, and a 
valuable acquisition to the colony. It also shows that the church 
at Wethersfield, (that is, a majority of its members) were about 
to remove with their pastor. The other minister alluded to, was 
Mr. Samuel Hooker, son of Mr. Thomas Hooker, of Hartford. 
He was then preaching at Springfield. In the agitation at Hart- 
ford, he appears to have harmonized in opinion with the minority 
of the church. 

The Committee appointed to lay out a new plantation at Nor- 
wottuck, made the following report, Sept. 30, 1659: — 

"In obedience to an order of the much Honored General Court in May last, appointing 
us whose names are subscribed, to lay out the bounds of the new plantation at Norwottuck 
on the river Connecticutt for the supply of those people that are to settle there; considering 
what people are to remove thither and the quality of the lands thereabouts, we have thought 
good to lay out their bounds on both sides of said River, viz. on the East side of said river 
their southerly bounds to be from the head of the Falls above Springfield and so to run east 
and by north the length of nine miles from the said river: And their Northerly bounds to 
be a little brook called by the Indians Nepasoaneage up to a mountain called Quunkwattchu, 
and so running eastward from the river the same length of nine miles: from their southerly 
bounds to the northerly bounds on the east side of the river is about ii or 12 miles, And on 


the west side of the river their bounds on the south are to join or meet with Northampton 
bounds, (which said bounds of Northampton come to a little riverett running betwixt two 
pieces of land called Capawonk and Wequittayyagg) And on the north their bounds to be 
a great mountain, called Wequomps; and the North and South bounds are to run west two 
miles from the great river; And from North to South on that side the river is about 
6 or 7 miles. 

Sept 30 1659. RICHARD LYMAN 

A postscript. Whereas it's said above that their north and south bounds are to run two 
miles west from the great river; it is intended that the south bounds are the riverett above 
mentioned upon what point soever it run, and the two miles west respects the straight line. 

The deputies approve of the return of this committee desiring the consent of the honored 
magistrates. WILLIAM TORREY, Clerk. 

Respited till nest court, [by the magistrates.] 

EDWARD RAWSON, Secretary. 

The report, it will be seen, was not accepted by the magistrates. 
Some of them had received grants of land, within the bounds laid 
out by the committee; and if they gave up these, they intended to 
take up other lands in the same valley. 

Hadley was never able to extend her bounds as far eastward as 
this committee proposed. Nepasoaneag brook, at its mouth, 
continued to be the northern limit. On the west side of the 
Capawonk meadow, then owned by Northampton, came up to 
the riverett, now Hatfield Mill river. Wequomps mountain was 
Sugar Loaf, now in Deerfield. 

All the transactions of 1659 that are recorded, may be found on 
pages II and 12. It may be presumed that the broad street and 
homelots were laid out in 1659; that a number of the engagers 
"came up to inhabit at the said plantation," in 1659, and built 
rude dw^ellings, where they lived during the next winter. Who, 
or how many, passed the winter there, cannot be known. The 
seven men, chosen Nov. 9, 1659, "to order all public occasions," 
and called Townsmen, were at the new plantation and made a 
rate, Nov. 22, 1659, and they, or a majority of them, probably 
wintered there with others. One of these Townsmen, Thomas 
Stanley, made his will, Jan. 29, 1659-60, in which he disposed of 
his house and land, "that are here at the new plantation," prov- 
ing conclusively that he then lived in the new town. 

No record whatever remains of their doings in 1660, previous 
to the 8th of October, and it may be concluded that no public 
business was performed that required a register. 

On the 8th of October, 1660, a Town-meeting, so called, was 
held at the house of Andrew Warner, and it was voted: — That no 
person should be owned for an inhabitant, or have liberty to vote 


or act in town affairs, until he should be legally received as an 
inhabitant — That all who sit down on the west side of the river, 
shall be one with those on the east side, in both ecclesiastical and 
civil matters, that are common to the whole; they paying all 
charges from their engagement, and all purchase-charges from 
the beginning. Those admitted for inhabitants on the west side 
of the river, are to be "inhabiting there in houses of their own by 
Michaelmas next," (Sept. 29, 1661,) and to sign an engagement 
by themselves, or some others for them. The votes or agreement 
at this meeting were signed by 28 persons, viz., John Webster, 
William Goodwin, John Crow, Nathaniel Ward, John White, 
Andrew Bacon, William Lewis, William Westwood, Richard 
Goodman, Thomas Standley, Samuel Porter, Ozias Goodwin, 
John Marsh, William Markum, Samuel Moody, Zechariah Field, 
Andrew Warner, Mr. John Russell, junr., Nathaniel Dickinson, 
Samuel Smith, Thomas Coleman, John Dickinson, Philip Smith, 
Thomas Wells, Thomas Dickinson, Richard Montague, Peter 
Tilton, Richard Billing. 

These 28 persons were perhaps all the engagers then in the new 
town, and included some who had not removed their families 
from Connecticut. 

Most of those who wished to settle on the west side of the river, 
signed an engagement for themselves, or their friends for them, to 
be dwellers there before Sept. 29, 1661. Some signed at the 
meeting, Oct. 8th, others Nov. ist, and some in January, Febru- 
ary or March, 1661. Twenty-five persons manifested an inten- 
tion before March 25, 1 66 1, to establish themselves on that side 
of the river, in the new town, viz., Aaron Cook, Thomas Meekins, 
William AUis, Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr., John Coleman, Isaac 
Graves (with his father, Thomas Graves,) John Graves, Samuel 
Belding, Stephen Taylor, John White, jr., Daniel Warner, Rich- 
ard Fellows, Richard Billing, Edward Benton, Mr. Ritchell (with 
his son,) Ozias Goodwin, Zechariah Field, Lieut. Thomas Bull, 
Gregory Wilterton, Nathaniel Porter, Daniel White, William Pit- 
kin, John Cole, Samuel Church, Samuel Dickinson. Of these 
25 persons, Aaron Cook and Samuel Church did not remove to 
the west side of the river; Ozias Goodwin, Lt. Bull, Gregory Wil- 
terton and William Pitkin continued to reside at Hartford, 
Nathaniel Porter at Windsor, and Mr. Ritchell or Richall and 
Edward Benton lived at Wethersfield. Sixteen were permanent 
residents on the west side. 

Two of these signers, Thomas Meekins and William Allis, be- 
longed to the Massachusetts Colony, and lived at Braintree. 


During the years 1659 and 1660, no permanent distribution of 
lands was made in the intervals or meadows. Men tilled parcels 
of the common lands, temporarily assigned to them. It was un- 
certain how many of the engagers would become actual settlers. 
The grants to Mr. Bradstreet and others, may have discouraged 
some; various things operated to dissuade others from the under- 
taking, and in the course of two years, many had changed their 
minds. New applicants appeared to supply their places, and 
there was no lack of settlers. 

Courts similar to County courts were ordered, by the General 
Court, in May, 1658, to be kept yearly, the last Tuesday of March 
and the last Tuesday of September, one at Springfield and one at 
Northampton. They were held by the Springfield Commissioners. 
In Oct. 1659, it was ordered as follows, concerning freemen and 
the new town: — 

"Those made freemen here, and who removed to Connecticut, and have now returned to 
this colony, are still freemen here, without any further oath. Those in the plantations on 
Connecticut River, who are not freemen, but capable by law to become so, are to be sworn 
by the Springfield Commissioners. The new town is to be under the power of the Spring- 
field Commissioners in regard to County Courts, till further order." 

"May 31, 1660. Mr. John Webster of the new town at Norwottuck, is by this Court 
commissionated with magistratical power for the year ensuing, to act in all civil and crimi- 
nal cases as one magistrate may do. He is to join the Commissioners in keeping the courts." 

Mr. John Webster, and the three Springfield Commissioners, 
viz., Capt. John Pynchon, Mr. Samuel Chapin and Elizur Holyoke, 
held a court at Springfield, Sept. 25, 1660 and another at North- 
ampton, March 26, 1661. On the same 26th of March, the 
Springfield Commissioners were at "Newtown or Norwotuck," 
(so they call the place) and the following persons took the free- 
man's oath before them, viz., Mr. John Webster, Mr. John 
Russell, Nathaniel Ward, William Markham, Thomas Dickinson, 
Andrew Bacon, Thomas Wells, John Hubbard, Nathaniel Dick- 
inson, Philip Smith, Thomas Coleman, Robert Boltwood, Samuel 
Gardner, Peter Tilton. There were others who had been made 
freemen in Massachusetts before they removed to Connecticut. 

Jurors from the New Town attended the Court for the first 
time, March, 1661, viz., Andrew Warner, William Lewis, John 
White, Samuel Smith. 

Mr. Webster, an eminent man, died on the 5th of April, a few 
days after this court. 

At a meeting. May 11, 1661, it was voted that all the freemen 
should meet at the house of Goodman Lewis "upon the next 2d 
day," (meaning the second day, or Monday, of the next week) 


with a committee, to consider of some things to present to the 
General Court, this month. 

Some things agreed upon at that meeting, may be inferred 
from the following order of the General Court, May 22, i66i, 
copied from the printed records: — 

"On the motion of the inhabitants of the new plantation nere Northampton, relating to 
sundry particculars, it is ordered by this Court, that the sd toune shall be called Hadley, and 
that for the better gouernment of the people, ^ suppressing of sinns there, some meete 
persons, annually presented by the freemen vnto this, shall be commissioned and empowred 
to act in seuerall services as followeth: first, the sajd commissioners, together with the com- 
missioners of Springfeild and Northampton, or the greater part of them, shall haue liberty 
& be impowred to keepe ye Courts appointed at Springfeild & Northampton; secondly, 
that the said commissioners for Hadley shall and are hereby empowred, without a jury, to 
heare ii. determine all ciuil actions not exceeding fiue pounds; 3dly, that the sajd commis- 
sioners for Hadley shall & are hereby empowred to dcale in all criminall cases according to 
laue, where the penalty shall not exceed tenn stripes for one offence; provided, that it shall 
be lawfull for any person sentenced by the sajd commissioners, either in ciuil or criminall 
cases, to appeale to the Court at Springfeild or Northampton; fourthly, that the persons for 
the yeare ensuing, & till others be nominated & chosen, for the toune of Hadley, appointed 
& authorized as aforesajd, are, Andrew Bacon, Mr. Samuell Smith, & Mr Wm Westwood; 
5thly,that the commissioners hereby appointed shall take theire oathes before Capt.Pinchon 
for the faithfull discharge of theire duty therein, who is hereby authorized to administer the 
same vnto them. It is also ordered by this Court, that the jurymen freemen for trialls at 
Springfeild & Northampton Courts shall take information & make presentments to ye 
Court of misdemeanors, as grand jurymen vsually doe, or ought to doe, and that the clarke 
of the Court for Springfeild & Northampton send forth warrants to the three tounes for 
jurymen, with respect to the ease of travill to each Court, & yt Mr John Russell, Sen, be 
clarke of ye writts for Hadley, and yt Mr Westwood, or, in his absence, one of the other 
commissioners, are hereby authorized to joyne persons in marriage at Hadley." 

This place, previously denominated the new town, the new 
plantation, or Norwottuck, was by the preceding act named Had- 
ley, and the incorporation of the town is commonly dated from 
the same act. The old towns in Massachusetts were not made 
legal bodies by any regular act of incorporation. A few words, 
declaring a place to be a town, and giving it a name, conferred 
all the powers and privileges of a town; and in some instances, 
the mere naming of a place seems to have been equivalent to an 
act of incorporation. In regard to Springfield and Northampton, 
no transaction of the General Court is recorded, which can be 
called an incorporation. 

Hadley, when it was named in 1661, had no established bound- 
aries, on either side of the river. The first purchases of the Indians 
had been made, viz., one on the east side, Dec. 25, 1658, and two 
on the west side in 1660. The three purchases cost the inhabit- 
ants 150 pounds. 

Hadley was named from Hadleigh or Hadley, a town in Eng- 
land, in the county of Suffolk, situated on the small river Berton, 
a branch of the Stour, a few miles west of Ipswich and east of 


Sudbury. It is not far from the northern boundary of Essex, a 
county from which came many of the early settlers of Hartford. 
The Saxon name of Hadleigh was Headlege, according to Cam- 
den. When he wrote, about 1600, it was famous for making 
woolen cloths. In 181 1, the population was 2592, and it had a 
handsome church. 

It may be conjectured that some of the first planters of Hadley 
came from the town of the same name in England. No record 
remains to show who they were. The name in the town and 
county records is sometimes written Hadleigh. 

Hadley chose five townsmen in December, 1660, and these men 
held the office 13 months, though what is deemed an act of incor- 
poration took place about 5 months after they were chosen. 
Others continued in office without a new choice. 

The judicial power conferred upon the Hadley commissioners 
under the 2d and 3d heads, in the order of May, 1661, was unusual 
and it was abrogated and made null in 1663. The commissioners 
of the three towns were empowered, in 1661, to hold courts at 
Springfield and Northampton, but the Northampton and Hadley 
commissioners do not appear as judges of these courts until 
March 31, 1663. 

The General Court in 1653, when they appointed a committee 
to divide the land at Nonotuck into two plantations, evidently 
contemplated a plantation on the eastern, as well as one on the 
western side of the river. Yet through forgetfulness, inattention 
or ignorance of this part of the colony, the General Court in May, 
1657, permitted Mr. Simon Bradstreet, to whom they had pre- 
viously granted 700 acres, to take up his grant on the eastern side 
of Connecticut River, in the vicinity of Northampton. They 
also granted to Maj. Daniel Denison, 500 acres, and to Mr. Sam- 
uel Symonds, 300 acres, near Mr. Bradstreet's. Gen. Humphrey 
Atherton also had a grant of 500 acres "at Nonotucke beyond 
Springfield," May 26, 1658. 

There were no deputies present from Springfield and North- 
ampton in 1657 and 1658, and those from the eastern towns knew 
very little about this remote region of "Nonotucke beyond Spring- 
field." But those individuals who obtained grants of land upon 
the river, were not ignorant of their value, and not unmindful of 
their own interests. 

On the 27th of May, 1659, after it was ascertained that the 
Connecticut people were about to remove to Norwottuck, the 
Deputies passed the following" vote, and the Magistrates con- 
sented : — 


The Court have granted to Mr. Bradstreet, Mr. Symonds, Maj. Gen. Denison and Maj. 
Atherton, each of them, a farm, which they intended to take upon Connecticut River, above 
Springfield; but as the taking it there will be very prejudicial to the new plantation, now 
going on there, which this Court is very willing to encourage, the Deputies desire the four 
Magistrates to find out some other place to take their farms in, and if it shall not be equal in 
respect to quality, it may be made up in quantity. 

In November, 1659, the Court added 200 acres to Maj. Ather- 
ton's grant, and he took the 700 acres at Waranoke; on the 31st 
of May, 1660, the Court added to Mr. Bradstreet's grant, 300 acres, 
to Mr. Symond's, 100 acres, and to Maj. Gen. Denison's, 300 
acres, in consideration of their having resigned their former 
grants, for the accommodation of the nev\^ tovi^n. And they had 
Hberty to take up their lands in any place on the west side of the 
river, "provided it be full six miles from the place now intended 
for Northampton meeting house, upon a straight line;" or they 
might take their grants elsewhere in unappropriated lands. Mr. 
Bradstreet was to have the first choice. 

Mr. Symonds took his land elsewhere; but Mr. Bradstreet 
determined to take 500 of his 1000 acres on the west side of the 
river; and Maj. Gen. Denison, 500 of his 800 acres, near Mr. 

Hadley did not complain of the decision of the General Court, 
and Mr. Bradstreet did not apparently manifest any dissatis- 
faction for about two years, but after he was sent to England as 
an agent of the colony, his son Samuel Bradstreet sent a petition 
to the General Court at the May session, 1662, stating that his 
father had chosen 500 acres on the west side of Connecticut River, 
betwixt 5 and 6 miles in a straight line from Northampton meet- 
ing house, "being for the most part compassed about with a great 
brook, a long pond or ponds and Connecticut River." He re- 
quested a confirmation of this land for his father, and used some 
flimsy arguments to show that his father ought to have it, though 
he had not gone 6 miles from Northampton meeting house. 

It is hardly to be supposed that the Magistrates were much in- 
fluenced by his arguments; yet they wished to do Mr. Bradstreet 
a favor, and were willing that he should have the land petitioned 
for. The Deputies did not consent, but said the grant must begin 
full 6 miles from Northampton meeting house, as before ordered. 

The subject was again presented to the Court at the October 
session, 1662, and the Deputies again gave Mr. Bradstreet his 
500 acres north of the 6 miles. The Magistrates did not consent 
to this, but gave Mr. Bradstreet the land where he desired it, south 
of the 6 miles line, and the Deputies finally agreed with them. 
The Deputies did not manifest as much perseverance as in some 


Other cases, when contending with the Magistrates or Upper 
House; and thus was consummated an act which Hadley people 
judged to be one of great injustice towards them; it was directly 
contrary to the order of May 31, 1660. 

This decision produced much excitement in Hadley. The land 
now granted to Mr. Bradstreet was an important interval or 
meadow, from which the settlers on the west side of the river had 
received, or were to receive, a large portion of their interval land. 
It was called the Higher Meadow, the North Meadow, and the 
Great Meadow. Its boundaries still are brooks, ponds and the 
river, and the southern part is within about a mile of Hatfield 
meeting house. It included near a fourth part of all the interval 
on both sides of the river. 

At the next General Court, May, 1663, earnest petitions were 
sent from the church and town of Hadley, and one from North- 
ampton in behalf of Hadley. They all believed that the act giving 
the Great Meadow to Mr. Bradstreet was not equitable. 

"The church of Christ in Hadley," in their petition, say, "we ask only what we have a 
right unto, derived from yourselves." They refer to the encouragement at first given by the 
court for them to settle at Hadley, and to the subsequent order requiring the gentlemen who 
had grants not to come within six miles of Northampton Meeting House. They request 
that this order may stand sure and steadfast. They estimate the interval given to Mr. 
Bradstreet, at "about one-fourth part of their serviceable land." They conclude with 
these words: — "the thing is likely to leave the house of God unfurnished amongst us as well 
as our civil society." The petition is signed by John Russell, Pastor; WUl. Goodwin, Ruling 
Elder; Nathaniel Dickinson and Peter Tilton, Deacons, in the name of the church. 

Henry Clarke, Andrew Bacon and William Westwood signed 
the petition in the name of the town of Hadley, May 25, 1663. 
This petition is much longer than that of the church and would 
fill two or three pages of this book. Some extracts and abstracts 

They request the General Court — "to lend a listening ear to our cry, occasioned by our 
present necessity and distress. Having viewed this place, although we found it bare and 
mean enough, in itself to answer our ends, and accompanied with many inconveniences 
besides the great one of its remoteness, yet considering the court's encouraging answer to 
our motion, we doubted not of enjoying what the place would afford." They then refer to 
the committee, appointed in May, 1659, to lay out the bounds of the plantation, who allotted 
to them the land they were pleading for, as appears by their return. "All the land here 
would not be sufficient for such a competency as was thought not too much for our neighbors 
in the nest plantation; [Northampton] yet they think their neighbors will find their place 
hard and the work heavy enough. They complain because so much land was given to Mr. 
Bradstreet and Maj. Gen. Denison "which discouraged some of our company, and several 
fell off, and among others, our dear and precious help in the ministry, Mr. Hooker." "As 
to our engrossing too much land, ten of the greatest men amongst us have not so much inter- 
val land as this farm Mr. Bradstreet pleads for, and that within three-fourths of a mile of 
our houses, and the furtherest part of it within one mile and three-fourths of our houses." 
— "The place (Hadley) has proved far worse for wintering cattle than was expected; and 
the transportation of other things is tedious. We have purchased of the Indians at such 
rates as we believe never any plantation in New England was purchased." 


Northampton was interested in the prosperity of these new 
settlements, being very desirous of neighbors on both sides of the 
river. A petition was therefore signed by 35 of the inhabitants 
of Northampton, in favor of the people of Hadley, May 19, 1663. 
Some extracts follow: — 

Our brethren profess themselves to have set down there confiding in the honored court's 
grant. The accommodations they have there, if they have all they expected, are but mean 
and very inconvenient for such a company, the uplands here being of inconsiderable value 
to what they are in other places. What is raised here is at small price, foreign commodities 
are dear, and the charge and trouble in transporting by land near 50 miles, will be more 
felt by those that do it than others can readily conceive of. Should they fail of a supply of 
food and clothing for their families, and many remove elsewhere, and the plantation be 
scattered, how much should we be disappointed who have hoped for the comfort and refresh- 
ing of Christian neighborhood. May it please the honored court, to take such order in the 
case as that the worthy gentlemen concerned may be no losers, and yet our societies not 
broken, nor our beginnings routed, nor the work of the Lord hindered. 

On the nth of June, 1663, Mr. Bradstreet sent to the General 
Court, a protest against the claims of Hadley, and referred to the 
decision in his favor in October, 1662. The Court adhered to 
that decision, and the petitions in favor of Hadley were unavailing. 

At the October session, 1663, the south line of Maj. Denison's 
farm was fixed at an oak tree, at the side of a great plain, near a 
swamp, about six miles from Northampton meeting house; the 
line to run east and west from the oak tree; and to extend to the 
north one mile on the river, and then west from the river far 
enough to make 500 acres. 

The south line of this farm seems to have been then considered 
the north line of Hadley on the west side of the river, Mr. 
Bradstreet's farm being included in the township. 

The lands had been so allotted on both sides of the river, that 
it became necessary to purchase Mr. Bradstreet's farm, even at a 
high price, in order to give the planters on the west side, their pro- 
portion of meadow land. In April, 1664, Lieut. Samuel Smith 
was empowered by the town to purchase this farm, but he was 
not to exceed 200 pounds. Mr. Bradstreet would not sell for 
this sum. At length it was agreed that he should have 200 
pounds, and looo acres of land lying north of Denison's farm, if 
it could be obtained. Lieut. Smith was under the necessity of 
petitioning the General Court, at the May session, 1664, for a 
gift of 1000 acres to Hadley, to enable the town to pay Mr. Brad- 
street. The Court granted the petition and Hadley paid the 200 
pounds in 1664 and 1665. Mr. Bradstreet, for his original grant 
of 700 acres, received 200 pounds, in money, a large sum in those 
days, 1000 acres of land upon Connecticut River, some of it valu- 


able, and 500 acres elsewhere in the colony. The 1000 acres are 
now in Whately. 

The Denison Farm and this second Bradstreet Farm are well 
known to the people of Hatfield and Whately. A tract of land 
called Bashan, lying south of the Denison Farm, was not included 
in Bradstreet's Interval. 


Division of lands in New England — Hadley Homelots and Street — Manner of distributing 
Hadley Intervals — East side and west side Intervals — Hatfield Homelots — Measuring 
Land — Common Fields and Fences — Gates. 

The fathers of New England evidently intended that every in- 
dustrious man should have the means of obtaining a competent 
share of the comforts of life; and for this end, land was distributed 
to all, and the cultivators were also proprietors of the soil. A 
distribution of land was a distribution of power. This was a 
wide departure from the system of Europe, where the land was 
owned by a few, and working men were poor, dependent and 

The General Court granted lands in townships, but seldom pre- 
scribed the manner in which they were to be apportioned among 
the inhabitants. In making allotments, no uniform rule was 
observed; lands were variously distributed in different towns, and 
even in the same town. In making divisions, persons and prop- 
erty were considered. The head of the family and the sons, and 
sometimes the wife and all the children, were taken into account. 
Ministers, and some besides them, received land from other con- 

In many towns in Massachusetts and Connecticut, some tracts 
were distributed equally to all the proprietors. Homelots were 
sometimes nearly equal. In a few towns, the least share was 
half as much as the greatest, or the poorest man received half as 
much land as the richest. In others, the smallest share was only 
one-third, one-fourth, one-sixth or one-tenth as much as the largest. 
In some, the inequality was much greater, a few individuals re- 
ceiving very large allotments on account of large estates and dis- 

A much greater proportion of the people of the old towns in 
Massachusetts and Connecticut were freeholders and independent 
proprietors soon after their settlement than at any subsequent 


period. Church-members and freemen had no advantage over 
others in the distribution of lands. — The later divisions of large 
tracts of woodland in Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield were 
far more unequal than the early apportionments of intervals. 

Hadley Homelots on the east side of the river. — By the agree- 
ment at Hartford in 1659, every planter was to have a homelot of 
8 acres. This equal division did not extend to other lands. The 
deficiency in a few of the homelots, which were less than 8 acres, 
was made up in the meadows. 

The spacious street, 20 rods wide, and the homelots on each 
side, 80 rods in length, must have been partially laid out in 1659. 
The town plot was laid out into four quarters, two on each side 
of the street, divided by a highway. It was voted Jan. 21, 1661, 
that the homelots should be well fenced by the middle of April 
next, each man doing his proportion. The ends of the street, 
and the west end of the middle lane into the woods, were to be 
fenced by the town, with posts and rails and gates. The home- 
lots required about 16 miles of fence. 

The street extended across the neck* or peninsula, near its 
junction with the main land, and had the river at each end. The 
length of the street on the west side was not far from a mile or 320 
rods; the distance on the east side was considerably more. At 
the north end, the street turned easterly. The idea of a street so 
wide, may have been suggested by the Broad-street at Wethers- 
field. In forming it, they appear to have regarded both utility 
and beauty. Besides other uses, this enclosure of about 40 acres 
was very convenient for grazing ground, when they had but few 
fenced pastures. 

In 1663, there were 47 houselots. Samuel Church lived with 
his father and had no houselot. Aaron Cooke lived with his 
father-in-law, William Westwood, and had no houselot. 

The plan of the village on the next page, exhibits the street and 
highways, the 47 houselots, and the names of the proprietors in 
1663. The figures denote the number of acres in each lot. A 
full lot of 8 acres was 16 rods wide. There was a broad space 
between the small lots at the north end and the river, and some 
years later, several small houselots were granted next to the river, 
and men built houses on these lots and lived there many years. 
M. in the street is the place where the first meeting-house stood. 
It was built after 1663. 

*Neck was the appellation which our fathers often gave to a peninsula and isthmus, as 
well as to other projections or points of land. The whole of Boston was sometimes called a 
neck of land. 







Samuel Gardner, 4 

North highway to the meadow. 

North highway to the woods. 

Chileab Smith, 


Joseph Baldwin, 


Robert Boltwood, 


Francis Barnard, 


John Hawks, 


Richard Church, 


Edward Church, 


Middle highway to the 


Henry Clark, 


Stephen Terry, 


Andrew Warner, 


John Marsh, 


Timothy Nash, 


John Webster, 


William Goodwin, 


John Crow, 


Samuel Moody, 


Nathaniel Wood, 


William Markham, 


South highway to the meadow. 
Joseph Kellogg. 











William Partrigg, 8 

Thomas Coleman, 8 

Samuel Smith, 8 

Philip Smith, 8 

Richard Montague, 8 

John Dickinson, 8 

Samuel Porter, 8 

Thomas Wells, 8 

John Hubbard, 8 

Town Lot, 8 

Mr. John Russell, Jr. 8 

South highway to the woods. 
John Russell, sr. i 

Middle highway to the woods. 

John Barnard, 




Andrew Bacon, 


Nathaniel Stanley, 



Thomas Stanley, 


John White, 


Peter Tilton, 


William Lewis, 


Richard Goodman, 


William Westwood, 


Thomas Dickinson, 


Nathaniel Dickinson, 







Manner of distributing Intervals or Meadows in Hadley. — 
Those who intended to remove to Hadley, had put in a sum "to 
take up lands by," in April, 1659. When the lands were divided, 
each proprietor received allotments according to a sum annexed 
to his name, called estate. These sums varied from 50 to 200 
pounds, and must have been the result of friendly consultation 
and agreement. How persons and property were considered, can- 
not be known. Some of the engagers were worth three times the 
sum set against their names, and some were worth less than the 
sum so affixed. — Hartford had divided lands according to sums 
set against the names of proprietors. 

In June^ 1662, three young, single men applied for land, viz., 
John Taylor, John Ingram and William Pixley, and in December, 
a small houselot was granted to each at the north end of the east 
houseiots, and 40;^ allotments in the meadows. One of them had 
been a servant, and it is believed that all had. Yet these 
unmarried men, without property, received one-fifth as much 
land as the most wealthy head of a family. 

Among the original proprietors of Hadley, the largest share of 
land was only four times greater than the smallest, and after the 
addition of the three in 1662, five times larger. The distributions 
of land seem to have been satisfactory to all, and their equity was 
never called in question. 

It is supposed that v/hen a tract of land was to be divided, there 
were as many tickets, numbered I, 2, 3, 4, &c. as there were per- 
sons to whom it was to be distributed; and that a ticket was drawn 
for each man, the number determining where his lot was to be in 
the tract. 

There were 48 proprietors (not including Aaron Cooke) on the 
east side of Connecticut River, who had the whole of the interval 
land on that side, below Mill River, and about 360 acres on the 
west side. The town reserved a lot in each division, and is one 
of the 48. These 48 proprietors all received their lands according 
to the sums affixed to their names in the following list. They are 
arranged by house-row, (as they sometimes are in the records) 
beginning at the lower or south houselot, on the east side of the 
street, and proceeding to the north end, and then coming down 
on the west side. The numbers in the second column of figures, 
exhibit the order of the 48 lots in Hockanum meadow, as they 
were drawn in March, 1663, and the other figures show the 
quantity of land in each lot. Aaron Cooke's estate and lands 
were not separate from Mr. Westwood's. 








Mr. John Russell, senr, 






Nathaniel Dickinson, 






Thomas Dickinson, 






Mr. Wm. Westwood, 






Richard Goodman, 






William Lewis, 






Peter Tilton, 






John White, 






Thomas Stanley, 






Nathaniel Stanley, 






Andrew Bacon, 






John Barnard, 






Mr. John Russell, Jr. 






The Town, 






John Hubbard, 






Thomas Wells, 






Samuel Porter, 






John Dickinson, 






Richard Montague, 






Philip Smith, 






Samuel Smith, 






Thomas Coleman, 






William Partrigg, 






Adam Nicholls, 





John Taylor, 






John Ingram, 






William Pixley, 






Samuel Gardner, 





Chileab Smith, 






Joseph Baldwin, 






Robert Boltwood, 






Francis Barnard, 





John Hawks, 






Richard Church, 






Samuel Church, 





Edward Church, 






Mr. Henry Clarke, 






Stephen Terry, 






Andrew Warner, 






John Marsh, 





Timothy Nash, 






Wm. & Thos. Webster, sons of John, 






Mr. Wm. Goodwin, 






John Crow, 






Samuel Moody, 






Nathaniel Ward, 






William Markham, 





Joseph Kellogg, 






6145 pounds. 
There are some errors in the acres of the 40 / proprietors ; and Samuel Moody has too many acres. 

Change of Proprietors. — In February, 1661, there were 46 east 
side proprietors, when the Meadow Plain was divided. Nine of 
these ceased to be proprietors in 1661 and 1662, viz., John Web- 
ster died in 1661, Robert Webster Hved at Hartford, EHzabeth, 
widow of Luke Hitchcock, married in Springfield, James Northam 


died in 1661, Capt. Cullick removed to Boston, Mr. Samuel 
Hooker was ordained at Farmington, 1661, Richard Weller re- 
moved to Northampton, John Arnold lived at Hartford. John 
Kellogg was perhaps a mistake for Joseph Kellogg. (John 
Hawks died 1662; left a family.) 

Eleven new proprietors were added before March, 1663, mak- 
ing 48, viz., the Town, which took Mr. Hooker's lots, Wm. and 
Thos. Webster as one, Henry Clarke from Windsor, Joseph Bald- 
win from Milford, who married the widow of James Northam, 
Timothy Nash from Hartford, Chileab Smith, Samuel Church, 
Joseph Kellogg from Farmington and last from Boston, John In 
gram, John Taylor,* William Pixley. 

Meadows on the East side of the River.— The alluvial meadows 
adjoining the Connecticut, induced men to settle at Hadley; for 
some years, grants of upland were not asked for. There were 
four meadows besides the School meadows, upon the east side of 
the river, that contained about 1200 acres; and these were allotted 
to the proprietors in 1661, 1662 and 1663, viz. 

I. Forty Acre Meadow, or Forty Acres, was north of the village 
towards Mill River. Hartford had a parcel of meadow so named. 
When distributed, it was estimated at about 67 acres, but con- 
tained considerably more. Those who lived in the north half of 
the village had the Forty Acres, and the Forlorn and some east of 
it, in the Great Meadow, as an equivalent for Fort Meadow, which 
the southern half of the village possessed. 

n. The Great Meadow included all the land upon the peninsula 
or neck, west and south of the homelots. It was divided into 177 
pieces or lots, containing according to the town measurers, about 
710 acres, and averaging 4 acres each Highways running westerly 
divided the meadow into oblong parcels denominated furlongs in 
the records. It is not far from two miles from the street to the 
extreme north-western point of the meadow; and more than a mile 
from the street to the river where Northampton bridge is. The 
north-west part of the meadow was called the Forlorn,f and 
sometimes Honeypot, from the name of a place in the river. 

The Great Meadow was formed into three divisions for dis- 
tribution, besides the Forlorn. One division adjoining the home- 
lots, was called the Meadow Plain. Excepting the homelots, 
this Plain was the first land divided among the settlers. The lots 
were drawn the last of February, 166 1. 

*John Taylor's lot on 24th page should be next to that of A. Nicholls. 
•|-A tract in Northampton, where deficiencies in other lands were made up, was called 


Below the south highway, now the old road to Northampton, 
a tract of mowing was called Maple Swamp and Aquavitae.* 
The latter name was at first Aquavitae Bottle, from a fancied 
resemblance in the shape to a case-bottle. 

III. Fort Meadow, south of the village, and most of it north and 
west of Fort River, was estimated to contain 147 acres, besides 
some south of the river and some low swamps. Those who lived 
in the southern part of the village had this meadow at the rate of 
5 acres to the 100 pounds. Those in the northern part of the vil- 
lage had as an offset 5 acres and 143 rods to the 100 pounds in 
Forty Acres, and in and near Forlorn. 

IV. Hockanum Meadow, below Fort Meadow, was a long point 
or neck of land, containing about 293 acres, but reduced to 276 
in the records, by the process of equalizing. A tract called swamp 
in the south-eastern part, was not included. The meadow ex- 
tended from the eastern lot south-westerly about 467 rods, or 
almost one mile and a half. The width of the neck, or length of 
the lots, was generally from 80 to 140 rods; a few were shorter 
near the south-west end. That part of the meadow which had 
become quite narrow, 25 or 30 rods wide, by the long-continued 
wearing of the river, and through which the river formed a new 
channel, on the 25th of February, 1840, was not less than 100 
rods wide in 1663. 

The Hockanum lots were drawn in March, 1663, and 100 
pounds drew 4 acres, 73 rods. The number and quantity of each 
man's lot may be found on page 26. Lot No. i was at the south- 
west end, and lot No. 48, at the north-east end. 

Equalizing Land. — This was done in some of the Hadley 
meadows. A committee valued the various parts of a tract, and 
decided that some should be received at more and some at less 
than 160 rods to an acre, though most at 160 rods. Two acres 
were given for one in some places; and in one instance, 120 rods 
were accounted an acre. 

School Meadows, north of Mill River, will be noticed in another 

Four Meadows on the West side of the river. — It is difficult to 
ascertain the quantity of land in two or three of these, as the lands 
of several proprietors are not recorded. The four meadows may 
have contained as many acres as the four on the east side, or 
above 1200. Considerable allowance was made for ponds, 
swamps and light lands. 

*This valuable grass meadow is still named Aquavitae, but the word is commonly written 
Aquavita, which is not good Latin. 


Swamps that produced hay which cattle would eat, however 
coarse, were deemed valuable, but some were too spongy and 
wet, and yielded only worthless aquatic herbs and shrubs. 

I. The Great, North, or Upper Meadow, which was purchased 
of Mr. Bradstreet, including a swamp adjoining, was separated 
into six divisions, and each west side proprietor had a lot in each 
division, and some was reserved. 

II. Little Meadow was at the north end of the street, and part 
of it east of the North Meadow. It was in two divisions. 

III. The South Meadow, or "the Meadow adjoining to the 
street," at the south end, was called Wequettayag by the Indians, 
and commonly Great Pansett in the records of Peter Tilton. It 
contained about 430 acres, with little or no waste land. The east 
side proprietors had the west part, called 205 acres, and the west 
side had the east part, about 225 acres, including Indian Bottom. 

Indian Bottom was the name of a tract of land adjoining the 
Connecticut in the South meadow, north of Hadley village. When 
Umpanchala sold this meadow and other lands, June 10, 1660, he 
reserved the Indian planting ground. He sold a part of this soon 
after, and the whole in a few years. From this reservation of 
Indian planting ground, the whole bottom has been called Indian 
Bottom or Indian Hollow. Most of it is productive and valuable 
mowing ground. 

The accession to Indian Bottom by the action of the river, has 
been extensive, but the original bottom is not yet doubled by the 
increase of 185 years. Hadley has lost more than Hatfield has 
gained. By the aid of the old records, the curved line of the 
river bank in 1662 can be nearly ascertained. The old bottom 
varied from 19 to 40 rods in width, exclusive of the western point. 
The new bottom nowhere exceeds 40 rods in breadth, and in 
some places is much narrower than the old. [This was written 
in 1847.] 

Opposite to this grass meadow, the inroads of the river upon 
Hadley have been destructive. The homesteads where some of 
the early settlers lived and died, the lands which they cultivated, 
and the highways which they traveled, have been carried away, 
and more serious consequences have been threatened.* 

IV. The south-west Meadow, which Northampton sold to 
Hadley, was then called Capawonk, and subsequently, Ampon- 
chus. Little Pansett, Little Pontius, &c. It is separated from 
Great Pansett by Mill River. The west side inhabitants had the 
upper part, denominated the Plain, at two acres for one. The 

*Tbe action of the river upon Hadley lands will be noticed elsewhere. 



east side had all Capawonk, except the Plain; after being equal- 
ized and ponds and worthless swamps rejected, the number of 
acres was about 157.* 

Recapitulation of the Distributions of Lands to East side Proprietors: — 
East side land. 

Forty Acre Meadow, 

Great Meadow, ....... 

Fort Meadow, ....... 

Below Fort River, ....... 

Hockanum Meadow, ...... 

West side land. 
Little Pansett, 
Great Pansett, 

loo;^ drew as follows in each of the seven divisions: 










Acres, rods. 

















1. In Fort Meadow, Forty Acres and Forlorn, half had 5 acres 

and half 5 acres and 143 rods, — average, 

2. In Hockanum Meadow, 

3. In the Plain, in Great Meadow, 

4. In Ploughland in do. 

5. In Last Division in do. 

6. In Little Pansett, West side, 

7. In Great Pansett, " 

Each loo pounds drew 25I acres of meadow land; 200;^ drew 50J acres; 150^ drew 37 J 
acres; 50^ drew i2| acres; ^o£ drew 10 acres, 16 rods. £6145 drew at this rate, 1552 acres; 
and 26 acres allowed for deficiencies in homelots, make 1578 acres. 

About one-half of the proprietors had seven lots each, and the other half, who drew in 
Forty Acres, 8 lots. There were some deviations, a few receiving in one division, their 
shares in two. 

Recapitulation of the Distributions of Land to West side Proprietors: — 

The number of proprietors who drew lots in the South Meadow and Little Meadow, was 
22, and the amount of estates, 2500 pounds; 23 drew in the North Meadow, and some land 
was reserved for others. 

ioo£ drew as follows: — 

In 3 divisions in South Meadow, ..... 

In the Meadow Plain, ....... 

In 2 divisions in Little Meadow, ..... 

In 6 divisions in North Meadow, ..... 

Each 100 pounds drew 27 acres, 60 rods, or 2 acres and 20 rods more than the east side 
proprietors had. This difference is not explained. The 23 proprietors drew about 700 acres. 

After the township was divided, it was estimated that Hadley had two-thirds of the im- 
provable or interval land, and Hatfield one-third. Hadley had not far from 1600 acres, 
and Hatfield about 800 acres. 

"So they made an end of dividing the country," as in the days of Joshua. This impor- 
tant business was performed harmoniously. No man claimed or received a great estate — 
no one had above 50^ acres of interval. The vast extent of upland was open to all equally 
for wood, timber and pasturage. 

*Pres. Dwight (Travels in N. E., Vol. i, p. 343,) estimates Capawonk at "eight or nine 
hundred acres of rich interval." He supposed, perhaps, that Capawonk included Great 
Pansett. The real Capawonk did not exceed 275 acres. 















With the houselots granted by Hatfield, 1670 to 1672. 

Wm. King later 
Samuel FielJ, 
Beniamm Wait. 
John Graves Jr. 
Samuel Focte, 
Robert Danks, — 

Deerfield Lane. 

Isaac Graves, Jr. 
Samuel Northam, 
Richard Morton, 
Town lot, 






100 j 

John Hawks, 
Mill Lane. 

Samuel Kellogg, 

Obadiah Dickinson, 

John AUis, 

Daniel White, 

William AUis, 
iThomas Meekins, 
2Thomas Meekins, Jr. 

Eleazar Frary, 

John Graves, 

Isaac Graves, 
I Stephen Taylor, 
2Barnabas Hinsdale, 
lOzias Goodwin, 
2Mr. Hope Atherton, 
iZechariah Field, 
2john Field, 





Highway to Northampton. 

150/ I John Cowles, 

\ 2 John Cowles, Jr. 
100/ iRichard Fellows, 

\ 2Widow Fellows, 


Highway to the river. 

Thomas Bracy, 
Hezekiah Dickinson, 
William Scott, 
Daniel Belden, 
Samuel Allis, 
Samuel Marsh, 
Nathaniel Foote, 

Philip Russell, 
Estate. Samuel Gillet, 
£100 John Wells, 
100 John Coleman, (16 rods 
100 Samuel Belden, 
100 William Gull, 
100 Samuel Dickinson, 
100 f I Edward Benton, 

\2Nathaniel Dickinson, sr. 
100 f I John White, Jr. 

\ 2Nicholas Worthington, 
150 Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr. 
100/ Richard Billing, 

\ Samuel Billing, 
100 Daniel Warner, 
125/ iThomas Bull, 

\ iTown to Mr. Atherton, 






A committee was appointed, Jan. 21, 1661, to lay out houselots 
on the west side of the river. Richard Fellows is supposed to 
have been the first settler on that side. A few families planted 
themselves there in 1661, and more in succeeding years, and the 
whole number in 1668 may have been from 25 to 28. The Hill, 
so called, west of Mill River, was not settled till after Philip's 


The houselots of John Hawks and Philip Russell, and all below 
them, on the plan of the village, were granted by Hadley. Those 
above or north of them were granted by Hatfield, of which some 
were forfeited and given to others. Hatfield re-granted the lots 
of Goodwin, Benton and Bull. Mr. Atherton, the first minister, 
lived on the Goodwin lot, as did his successor, Mr, Chauncey. 
Barnabas Hinsdale married the widow of Stephen Taylor, and 
lived in her house. Nicholas Worthington married the widow of 
John White, Jr. and lived in her house. Thomas Meekins, sr. 
removed from the street and lived near his mill. John Coleman, 
about 1678, changed his residence, and lived on the Benton lot, 
and Samuel Belden resided on Coleman's first lot. No one lived 
on the Bull lot for many years. The greater part of the lots were 
of 8 acres; some were only 4. Those on the east side were short 
in the upper part, the 4 acre lots being 16 rods wide. The length 
of the street on the west side, from the highway to Northampton 
to the north end, was about 340 rods. The street formerly ex- 
tended farther south than now, against the houselots of Cowles 
and Fellows. 

Almost all the lands in the towns upon Connecticut River, were 
laid out without the aid of a surveyor's compass. The Town 
measurers commonly had a measuring chain, and perhaps a 
square to form right angles. Their calculations were in general 
sufficiently accurate, though not exact. The north star was some- 
times regarded in establishing important lines. 

Town measurers were first chosen in Hadley, Dec. 31, 1660, 
and were Samuel Smith and Peter Tilton. They were to lay out 
all the lands and keep a record of the length and breadth of every 
man's lot, and put stakes in the front and rear of every lot, with 
the initials of the man on his stake, "in some distinguishing let- 
ters." They were to receive three pence per acre for their trouble. 

Peter Tilton was the first recorder of lands in Hadley, chosen 
Feb. 9, 1663. With a few exceptions, he recorded all the home- 
lots and allotments in the intervals, with their bounds, width and 
number of acres, in a peculiar but legible hand. The lands of 
John Barnard, Frances Barnard, the town lots, and the lands of 
some proprietors on the west side, are not recorded. 

The first regular surveyor with a compass, that resided in any 
town upon the Connecticut, was Caleb Stanley, Jr. of Hartford. 
He bought a surveyor's compass a few years before 1700. Tim- 
othy Dwight, born in 1694, the grandfather of President Dwight, 
was the first surveyor and owner of surveying instruments that 


lived in Northampton. Nathaniel Kellogg, Jr., born in 1693, was 
the first surveyor that resided in Hadley. 

The surveyor's compass was used at Pocomtuck, (Deerfield) 
in 1665, by Joshua Fisher, of Dedham. 

The early settlers of New England were acquainted with com- 
mon fields in England, occupied by the tenantry of a parish or 
village; and they established common fields here, owned by free- 
holders. They could not have done otherwise in the intervals of 
the Connecticut. Where every man has his share of land in 
each division, the lots must be small; and if they were larger, par- 
tition fences could not be maintained against the river floods. 

A common field was necessarily surrounded by a common 
fence, except in places where a river, mountain, or fence about 
other land, served for a barrier against domestic animals. Each 
proprietor of a common field was to fence according to the number 
of acres he held in the field, and the place of his fence, like that of 
his land, was fixed by lot. A quantity of upland was sometimes 
included within the meadow fence. 

The Great Meadow was secured by the homelot fences. Hock- 
anum Meadow was protected by Mount Holyoke for a long dis- 
tance; a fence was necessary in some places near the south-west 
end of the mountain, and at the north, a fence was made in 1663, 
from Fort Meadow fence "to the mountain where it is impass- 
able," above 200 rods. At a later period, the fences of both 
meadows were united, making in all 700 rods, of which, near 500 
rods were on Lawrence's Plain and the lower part of Mount 

Great and Little Pansett, on the west side, were fenced in 1662, 
from the Connecticut at the lower end, round to the Connecticut 
east of the village. The east side proprietors made about 500 
rods of the southern part of the fence, and the west side propri- 
etors made the rest. 

Hadley ordered, in 1669, that Little Pansett fence should be 
made "vv'ith ditch, posts and two or three rails on the same," or 
as expressed in another vote, "with ditch and two poles or three 
rails on the same." The broad ditch and high bank of earth 
thrown out of the ditch, were an important part of the old com- 
mon fence; they may still be seen on both sides of the river. The 
ditch was on the outside of the bank and rails, for the main object 
of the fence was to secure the meadows from domestic animals 
that roved in the woods on the outside. — Some of the meadow 
fences and perhaps most of the homelot fences were made of 
posts and rails without a ditch. Fences 5 rails high, and 4 feet 


4 inches high, are mentioned on the west side. All fences were 
to be sufficient against horses, cattle, hogs and sheep. 

Gates in common fences that crossed public highways, were 
necessary appendages of the common field system, and were 
rather troublesome to travelers. Hadley had at first two such 
gates in the county road to Springfield, one called the mountain 
gate, near the end of the mountain, and the other, near the north- 
west corner of Fort Meadow. There were gates or bars in all 
highways into common fields, in the village and elsewhere. Bars 
were not common. If a person left open the gate or bars of a 
meadow, he was to pay 2s. 6d. Some meadow gates in county 
roads, continued down to the present century. 

In 1663, every man was ordered to bound his land with meer- 
stones; and those whose land adjoined, were to be called, to see 
the meer-stones set down betwixt them. 


Highways — Bridges — Ferries — Grist-mills — Bolting-mills— Saw-mills and sawing boards 

by hand. 

The early settlers of Hadley first designated the street and 
highways, and then laid out the lots of land contiguous to them. 
The supposition that the ways in this and other old towns were 
laid over the land of individuals is without the least foundation. 

In 1665, Peter Tilton recorded the street and eleven other 
highways in Hadley, all in the village and meadows. He seems 
to have considered the north highway into the woods, as a con- 
tinuation of the broad street. In 1667, the town ordered a pass- 
able cart-way to be made along the Forty Acres to Mill Brook, — 
the first road ordered by the town on the uplands. 

Before Hadley was begun, the Northampton people had a way 
to Windsor and Hartford through Waranoke, (afterwards West- 
field;) and they also had a way to Springfield on the east side. 
Mount Tom was an obstruction on the west side. They crossed 
the river to Hockanum meadow, and perhaps higher also. The 
people of Hadley made use of both of these roads; and they con- 
tinued the Springfield road up to their plantation. They selected 
a route along the side of Mount Holyoke, below the steep part of 
the acclivity, some distance above the present road, and this was 


traveled more than 80 years. Some of the ground at the foot of 
the mountain was considered too wet and queachy for a highway. 
There were complaints of bad and dangerous places in the 
highways, and the County Court appointed a committee, in March 
1664, to lay out highways on both sides of the river between Had- 
ley and Windsor, and to determine by whom they should be re- 
paired. The men were George Colton and Benjamin Cooley of 
Springfield, Henry Woodward and Capt. Aaron Cooke of North- 
ampton, and Andrew Warner and William Allis of Hadley. 
Five made their return, a copy of which follows, from the records 
of the county court : — 

Northampton, May ye 21st 1664. Wee doe agree and determine that ye highway from 
Hadley towne's end, on ye east side of ye great river, to ye Fort meddow gate, running as it 
now lyes, bee in breadth six rodds, and from thence to ye lower end of ye sd meddow in 
breadth two rods, and from thence (ye way lying still as it doth,) to ye end of Mount Holyoke* 
in breadth ten rodds, and from thence to Scanunganunk as ye cartway now runs in breadth 
twenty rodds, and from thence to Springfeild to the upper end of the causey going down 
into ye towne, six rodds, and from ye lower end of Springfeild to Longmeddow gate, running 
where it now doth, in breadth foure rods, and from ye Longmeddow gate to the bridge at ye 
lower end by the river's bank shall be in breadth two rods, and from ye lower end of the 
said meddow unto Freshwater river soe called, as the way now runs foure rodds, and from 
thence to Namerick where John Bissell had a barne standinge, as now the way runs, twenty 
rods, and from thence to Namerick brook where will best suite for a bridge, two rods, and 
from thence to the dividing lyne betweene the CoUonyes, where ye horseway now lyes two 
rods. And from the said dividing lyne on the west side of ye river towards Waranoak, in 
the way that is now improved, comonly called ye new way, that is to say, to two miles brooke 
fourty rods, and from thence to Waranoak hill where the trading house stood, twenty rods, 
and from thence to ye passage of ye river where ye way now lies six rods, and from thence 
through ye other meddow to ye great hill as the way now lyes six rodds, and from thence to 
Munhan river forty rods, and from Munhan river to ye lotts now laid out neere ye Mill 
river fourty rods, and from thence to the town of Northampton fToure rods, and from North- 
ampton along by the comon fence side unto ye great river six rods in breadth, & from ye 
river side just opposite on ye east side, to run cross to the middle way that leades to ye 
centre of Hadley towne two rods, and soe to Hadley towne two rodds, allowing for the con- 
veniency of landing places, an acre of land on each side of the river, to be in length twenty 
rods and in breadth eight rods, viz on Northampton side upp ye river from ye fence and on 
ye other side up & down the river, each towne to make its own landing place. The fferry to 
be appoynted by the next county Courte, and in ye meanetyme yt the way through North- 
ampton may be improved as formerly. And further we judge and determine that the towne 
of Hadley shall make and maintayne all ye highwayes and bridges from their towne to 
Scanunganunk, and Springfeild shall make & maintayne ye bridges & wayes from Scan- 
unganunk to the foote of the [falls,] and in case it appeares to be our collonyes right, over 
Namerick brooke, that the way be made and mayntayned by this county. And the wayes 
and bridges from the landing place at the great river [in Northampton] unto the top of War- 
anoak hill to be made and mayntayned by North Hampton, and from thence unto Windsor 
to be made and mayntayned by Hadley & Northampton mutually. And further wee deter- 
mine yt if Hadley & Northampton eyther or both of them shall at any tyme hereafter see 
cause to desert the highway they now use and shall make the way through Springfield their 
comon roade to Windsor for carting, then eyther or both shall contribute to ye mending the 
bridge at Long meddow. And for these several wayes & bridges to be made and repaired 
sufficient for travell with carts, wee determine that they be done by the severall townes 

*The mountain undoubtedly bore this name some years before 1664. 


respectively at or before ye sixth day of June next, as also yt such stones as are moveable 
in Scanunganunk river be turned aside out of the cartway and ye charge thereof to be paid 
by the County Treasurer. 


These were the first county roads in Hampshire. They fol- 
lowed the ways previously used by the early settlers. These three 
towns maintained for some years two roads near 40 miles each, 
from Hadley and Northampton to Connecticut line, which was 
then supposed to be south of the present north line of Windsor. 
Northampton and Hadley sent men and perhaps teams, to repair 
roads where Suffield now is. They were complained of in Sep- 
tember, 1668, for defective way between Waranoke and Windsor. 
They amended the defects, and were discharged in March, i66g, 
on paying the recorder's fees. The large streams, Chickopee, 
Manhan, Waranoke and others had no bridges. It was hard 
carting on such roads.* 

Scanunganunk, where the road crossed the Chickopee, was 
not far from the present Chickopee Factories. Hadley made 
some efforts in 1665 and after, for a road near the Connecticut, 
through the low land. Such a road was laid in 1673, crossing 
Chickopee river at the Islands near Japhet Chapin's. Hadley 
thus gained access to the Connecticut near the head of boat navi- 
gation, below the Willimanset Rapids, and carted produce down 
to the boats. 

The passing between Hadley and Northampton was by the 
ferry at the lower end of Hadley street, and Northampton meadow. 
The road across Hadley meadow, proposed by the committee of 
1664, was opposed by the town, and never made. The two towns 
agreed in 1665, to have the road continue in Northampton mead- 
ow. — The travel between Springfield and Northampton, for a 
number of years, was chiefly through Hadley village. 

The Bay Road, or road towards Boston, has been in different 
places in Hadley. In early days, there was a "Nashaway Path" 
north of Fort River, which still bears the old name. In 1674 and 
many years after, the Bay Road crossed Fort River, near the 
south end of Spruce Hill. The road was laid out where it now is 
after 1688, but no record of the change is found. 

The Bay Road, which was used by Hadley and Northampton, 
met the Springfield Bay Road at Quabaug (Brookfield,) where a 
few English families settled about 1664, and where travelers 

*The complaint about transportation, on the zist page, was well founded. 


often lodged. The Hadley road at a later period, and probably 
in early days, crossed Ware River and Coy's Hill north of the 
present Ware Village. East of Quabaug, there were ?t least 
three ways leading from the Bay towards the Connecticut — 
through Nashua (Lancaster,) Quinsigamond (Worcester,) and 
Hassanamesit (Grafton.) 

In December, 1661, Hadley voted 45 shillings, "towards laying 
out a commodious way to the Bay by Nashaway." In Septem- 
ber, 1 68 1, some men came from Lancaster to Hadley, to treat 
about laying out a way "from thence hither." A committee was 
chosen to confer with them, and with the committees of North- 
ampton and Hatfield. 

The fires of the Indians had destroyed most of the underbrush, 
the woods were open, and forests were crossed without much 
difficulty. Streams, hills and swamps impeded the traveler. 
The Indians had paths between their villages and tribes, which 
were sometimes followed by the English. They were only a foot 
wide, according to Johnson, and "seldom broader than a cart's 
rut," according to Wood, referring to the beaten path made by 
their feet. They traveled in "Indian file." 

The old ways to Quabaug and Nashua were only paths for 
men and horses. In 1692, Hatfield chose a man to join with 
som.e of Northampton and Hadley, "to lay out a way to the Bay 
for horses and carts, if feasible." It was not feasible, and wheels 
and runners did not pass from Hadley to Boston for many years 
after 1692. 

The first bridge built in Hadley for horses, oxen and carts, was 
over Fort River, on the Springfield road. A committee was 
chosen to build it, Sept. 4, 1661. The second bridge over this 
stream, on the road to Hockanum meadow as well as to Spring- 
field, was ordered Aug. 28, 1667, and was to be lower down than 
the old one. The third bridge over the same stream, on the same 
road, was voted Sept. 16, 1681, and was to be below the old one, 
"in the highest and most advantageous place." It cost ;^44. 15.3. 

The County Court in March, 1674, blamed Hadley for not 
joining Northampton in laying out a way to Quabaug, and re- 
quired Hadley to build "at least a foot bridge," over Fort River, 
on the way to Qiiabaug. On the 12th of February, 1675, the 
town voted to build a cart-bridge, and this was the first bridge on 
the Bay road. It was near the south end of Spruce Hill, and was 
much used by the troops in Philip's war. In January, 1688, a 
committee was chosen to consider whether it was best to build a 
new bridge or repair the old one. Between 1688 and 1699, a new 


Bay road was laid, where it has since remained, and a new bridge 
was built near where the bridge and Smith's mills now are, about 
half a mile below Spruce Hill. There is no record of the laying 
out of this road, nor of the building of the bridge. Most of the 
records are missing from April lo, 1688 to January, 1690. This 
bridge was called Lawrence's bridge. 

On the 14th of January, 1684, the town voted to build a bridge 
over Mill River at the mill, "by tressels or otherwise as the select- 
men and Samuel Porter, senior, shall judge best." It cost only 

These bridges were built by calling out the people to labor, 
every man according to his estate. Other public works were done 
in the same manner. The price of labor was from 2s. 
to 2s^ 6d. per day. Those who did not labor, paid in grain, &c. 

In 1672, John Smith of Hadley, was directed by the Court, "to 
fell a tree across Swift River, for a foot bridge, if any such be near 
at hand." Such foot bridges were not uncommon. 

In October, 1686, one of the Fort River bridges was partly 
burnt in a time of drouth, apparently by fire from the woods. 
The Selectmen prohibited the firing of woods and fields. 

A small homelot in Hadley, below the south highway into the 
meadow, was reserved as a ferry lot, and in 1661, the town made 
an agreement with Joseph Kellogg to keep the ferry between 
Hadley and Northampton, and he built on the ferry lot. The 
attempt in 1664 to have a ferry on the Northampton side, in con- 
nection with a road in Hadley meadow, did not succeed. 

In January, 1675, a committee appointed by the Court made 
an agreement with Joseph Kellogg. He was to have a boat for 
horses and a canoe for persons, and to receive for man and horse, 
8 pence in wheat or other pay, or 6 pence in money; for single 
persons, 3 pence, and when more than one, two pence each. On 
Lecture* days, people passing to and from Lecture were to pay 
only one penny each, if 6 or more went over together. Troopers 
passing to and from trooping exercises, were to pay only 3 pence 
for man and horse. Kellogg might entertain travelers. 

In 1687, another agreement was made with Joseph Kellogg. 
The fare for horses, men and troops was the same as in 1675. 
Lectures not mentioned. After day-light till 9 o'clock, he might 
take double price. At later hours, and in storms and floods, 
those who would cross, must agree with the ferryman. Kellogg 
was still allowed to entertain strangers. Others might not carry 

♦Circular weekly Lectures were probably commenced in these towns some years before. 


over persons within 50 rods of the ferry place, except men to their 
day-labor. — Joseph Kellogg, and his son John Kellogg, and his 
grandson James Kellogg kept this ferry until 1758, almost a cen- 
tury; and Stephen Goodman, who married a daughter of James 
Kellogg, kept it still later, and from him it received its last name, 
"Goodman's Ferry." 

The river was formerly near the lower end of the street, and the 
landing was not far from Kellogg's house. Aquavitae meadow 
has received a great addition from Northampton meadow, and 
the enlargement continues against and below the end of the street, 
and the river is now 45 or 50 rods south of the old landing place. 

There is no record of a regular ferry at the north end of the 
street, between Hadley and Hatfield, until 1692. Many on the 
east side owned and cultivated land on the west side, and canoes 
and boats were frequently passing. There were more lively 
scenes on the Connecticut in those days than now. John Ingram 
appears as ferryman at the north end in 1692, and the ferriage in 
1696 was 4 pence for a man and horse, 3 pence for a horse or 
horned beast, and one penny for a man, if paid down in money. 
If not so paid, Ingram might demand double, or do as they could 
agree. John Preston succeeded Ingram. 

A Grist-mill, (more often called by the English and our fathers, 
a Corn-mill,) was built in Hadley, in 1661, west of the Connecticut, 
upon Mill River. The stream in Hatfield, Hadley and many 
other towns, upon which the first mill was built, was named Mill 
River or Mill Brook. Hadley chose a committee to treat with 
Goodman Meekins about building a mill, on the first of April, 
1661, and in December, the town voted that they would have all 
their grain ground at his mill, "provided he make good meal," 
and they gave him 20 acres of land near the mill for building it. 
Thomas Meekins was a mill-wright and assisted to build mills in 
other towns. — On the 8th of November, 1662, the east side inhab- 
itants agreed with Thomas Wells and John Hubbard to carry their 
grain over the river to the mill, on certain days of the week, and 
bring back the meal, at three pence per bushel, to be paid in 
wheat at 3s. 6d., and Indian corn at 2s. 3d. per bushel. 

In 1665 and 1667, the people of Hadley, on the east side, 
thought of building a corn-mill upon their own Mill River, about 
three miles north of the village. About 1670, William Goodwin, 
one of the trustees of the Hopkins donation, conceiving that a 
corn-mill would yield a good income to the Hadley Grammar 
School, invested a portion of the donation in building a mill at 


Mill River. In October, 1671, the town gave a piece of land near 
the mill as a houselot for the miller. In Philip's war, the mill 
was garrisoned at times, and was preserved until September, 1677, 
when it was burnt by the Indians, who had made an attack upon 
Hatfield. The people of Hadley again resorted to Hatfield mill. 

The committee or trustees of the Grammar School, declining to 
rebuild the mill, it was rebuilt by Robert Boltwood, encouraged by 
the town, about 1678 or 1679. The committee of the Grammar 
School obtained it in 1683; Samuel Boltwood had it in 1685; and 
it was again delivered up to the trustees of the Hopkins School in 
1687, in whose possession it remained. 

The mill and dam were rebuilt in 1692, after the great February 
flood of that year; a new mill became necessary in 1706, and 
another in 1721. 

Some of the mill-stones used in this valley in early days were of 
the red sandstone, called pudding stone, judging from fragments 
that remain. Other kinds of stone may have been used. When 
the School Mill was rebuilt in 1692, several days were spent in 
"looking for mill-stones," and one stone was purchased of John 
Webb of Northampton, for 8 pounds. It was probably sandstone 
from Mount Tom. In 1666, John Pynchon gave John Webb 
of Northampton, 20 pounds for a pair of mill-stones delivered at 

The School trustees employed John Clary as miller in 1683. 
In November, 1687, Joseph Smith, the cooper, began to attend 
the mill, and had the care of it until old age, alone or with his 
sons. He had one-half the toll, and the use of a house and some 
land, and pay for his labor on the mill, excepting small repairs. 
The whole toll for 6 or 7 years, averaged only 26 pounds a year, 
chiefly wheat and Indian corn. Joseph Smith was the first per- 
manent resident at Mill River. 

'Bolting-mills moved by water were hardly known in England, 
when our fathers emigrated about 1630. They were moved by 
hand. Families sifted or bolted their own meal, or used it un- 
bolted. In New England, for 100 years after 1630, there were 
no bolters carried by water. The separation of bran from flour 
was the work of the family, and of the baker, and of those who 
sent flour to market. In Hadley, much flour was packed in 
barrels and sent down the river, and the meal was all brought 
from the mill to the village and bolted. Several persons had 
what was called a bolting-mill, as John Smith, William Partrigg, 
Philip Smith, Richard Montague, Mr. John Russell, Jr. and 


Timothy Nash. It required a frame and lo or 12 yards of nar- 
row bolting cloth for one of these domestic bolting-mills. Rich- 
ard Montague is said to have been a baker, and his bolting-mill 
was valued at 60 shillings in 1680. His widow sometimes bolted 
flour for others, by the barrel. Most housewives were satisfied 
with hair sieves; some had bolting-cloth sieves. Lawn sieves are 
mentioned after 1700. — ^Flour was sold in large barrels by the 
112 lbs. 

Boards had always been sawed by hand in England and not by 
saw-mills. There was no saw-mill in Virginia, when that colony 
had been settled 40 years. There were no saw-mills in the old 
towns in the colonies of Massachusetts, Connecticut and New 
Haven, for some years after their settlement. Boards, plank and 
slit-work were sawed by hand. The wages of sawyers were reg- 
ulated by the colonies, for a few years, and also by Hartford, 
Springfield and other towns. In New Haven, the "top-man" 
who was on the top of the log and guided the work, had a little 
higher wages than the "pit-man" who was in the saw-pit below. 
Two men were expected to saw about 100 feet of boards in a day, 
when the logs were squared and brought to the pit. The first 
saw-mill in Springfield was built by John Pynchon, in 1667, after 
the town had been settled 31 years. He had previously paid to 
hand-sawyers two shillings per day for sawing many thousands 
of boards. 

The early settlers of Hadley built houses and some commodious 
ones before they had the aid of any saw-mill. As Northampton 
had sawyers and saw-pits, it may be concluded that Hadley had 
them also, though they are not noticed in the records. The clap- 
boards of those days, which were split out like staves, helped to 
supply the deficiency of sawn boards. 

Hadley gave to Thomas Meekins and Robert Boltwood, lib- 
erty to set a saw-mill on Mill River, on the east side, Jan. 27, 1662, 
and they might fall pine and oak timber, except rift timber, in 
the Great Swamp beyond this river, and within 80 rods of the 
mill, on this side. The mill seems to have been built about 
1664 or 1665, and the town probably had to depend on pit-saws 
only 5 or 6 years. Thomas Meekins had a saw-mill on the west 
side, about 1669. 

Boltwood's saw-mill did not continue many years, and he sold 
his right to the place to three men in 1674. If they built a mill, 
it did not long remain. On the 12th of February, 1684, when 
they were destitute of a saw-mill, the town granted liberty for 


three, in one day, viz., one on Mill River, one south of Mount 
Holyoke, and one on Fort River, above where Dickinson's tannery 
now is. 

The first saw-mill erected in New England, was on a branch of 
the Piscataqua, about 1633. The workmen were Danes. 


First Meeting-house — Bells — Mr. Russell, the first Minister — Salaries of ministers — Hadley 


A house where the people might meet for public worship and 
religious instruction, was an early object of attention in Hadley, 
as in most other places in New England. On the 12th of Decem- 
ber, 1 66 1, the town ordered as follows: — 

"The town have ordered that they will build and erect a meeting-house, to be a place of 
public worship, whose figure is, (in length and breadth,) 45 feet in length and 24 feet in 
breadth, with Leantors [Leantos] on both sides, which shall enlarge the whole to 36 in 

The town have ordered that the meeting-house abovesaid, when prepared, shall be situ- 
ated and set up in the common street, betwixt Mr. Terry's house and Richard Montague's, 
in the most convenient place, as the committee chosen by the town shall determine. 

The town have ordered Mr. Russell, Mr. Goodwin, Goodman Lewis, Goodman Warner, 
Goodman Dickinson, Goodman Meekins and Goodman Allis, a committee for the afore- 
said occasions." 

Leanto is a significant English word, indicating a part of a 
building that seems to lean to, or upon a higher part. It was 
often used in reference to private buildings. — The house was to 
be erected in the northern part of the street, to accommodate the 
west side inhabitants. It was not built for several years. The 
work may have been delayed by the diflSculties with Mr. Brad- 
street and the payment of 200 pounds to him. On the 27th of 
August, 1663, the town voted to set about building the meeting- 
house, and chose a new committee, viz., Mr. Clarke, Lieut. 
Smith, Mr. Westwood, John Barnard, Nathaniel Dickinson, 
Thomas Meekins and Isaac Graves. They were to manage the 
work, order the form, call out men, and set the wages of men and 
teams. Meanwhile, the people did not neglect to meet on the 
first day of the week. A house was hired, and Dec. 10, 1663, 
Mr. Goodwin and John Barnard were chosen to seat persons in 
it "in a more comely order," and it was voted to hire the house 
another year. About two years later, Nov. 7, 1665, the meeting- 


house was said to be framed, but not raised. After it was raised 
and covered, the inside work was delayed, probably in conse- 
quence of the west side inhabitants desiring to be a separate 
parish, and seats were not voted till Feb. 21, 1668. The build- 
ing seems not to have been completed till Jan. 12, 1670, when the 
town chose the two deacons, the two elders and Mr. Henry 
Clarke, to order the seating of persons in the meeting-house. 
Every person seated was to pay a part of the expense for making 
his seat. 128 seats for 128 persons, male and female, were paid 
for, at 3s. 3d. each. These 128 persons were heads of families 
or at least adults. 

The form and dimensions of this house cannot be known from 
records nor tradition. The second committee had power to 
model it as they pleased, and they deviated considerably from 
the vote of Dec. 12, 1661. They appear to have rejected the 
leantos and to have made the upper part as wide as the lower. 
There was doubtless a turret, or place for a bell, rising from the 
center of the roof, as in most early New England meeting-houses. 
Galleries on the north and south sides of the house were voted 
Jan. 9, 1699, and a gallery, which must have been on one end, is 
referred to as partly built. This vote shows that the ends of the 
house were east and west and that the pulpit was at one end, 
apparently at the west end. There is no reason to suppose that 
the length of the house much exceeded the breadth. Some seats 
had to be altered, to make "a more commodious passage up into 
the galleries." The seats were probably long seats, like others 
of that age, holding 5 or 6 persons each. They were to be built 
"with boards and rails." In those days a few pews, square or 
oblong, were built against the walls of some meeting-houses, but 
pews in general were of later introduction. For a long tune, men 
and women occupied different seats* in Hadley, as elsewhere in 
New England. In nearly all meeting-houses, when the minister 
faced the congregation, the males were on his right, and the 
females on his left, on the lower floor, and in the galleries. The 
singers were mingled with the others, and all singing was congre- 

The town voted, Jan. 11, 1672, "that there shall be some sticks 
set up in the meeting-house in several places, with some fit per- 
sons placed by them, and to use them as occasion shall require, 
to keep the youth from disorder." The youth were often trouble- 
some in the old meeting-houses. 

*This old custom of separating the sexes, I have noticed in Methodist churches within 
15 or 20 years. 


A few months after the meeting-house was finished, Sept. 3, 
1670, the town voted to buy the bell brought up by Lieut. Smith 
and others, and to pay for it by a rate, in winter wheat, at 3 shil- 
lings per bushel. "If Lieut. Smith gets 4s. 3d. for the wheat in 
Boston, he is paid; if less, the town is to make it up; if more, he 
is to repay." The freight of wheat to Boston was estimated at 
IS. 3d. per bushel. The debt for the bell was £, or about 25 
dollars, indicating that the bell was small. Henry Clarke, who 
died in 1675, gave by his will "40 shillings besides 40 shillings 
formerly given, for a bigger bell that may be heard generally by 
the inhabitants." If a new bell was obtained, it was paid for by 
individuals and not by the town. The town voted, Dec. 21, 1676, 
"that the bell in the m.eeting-house shall be rung at 9 o'clock at 
night, throughout the year, winter and summer." Jan. 13, 1690, 
Mr. Partrigg was chosen to secure such a bell as is at Northan)p- 
ton; the selectmen to make the best they can of the old one. 

Hartford began to ring the bell at 9 o'clock, in 1665, "to pre- 
vent disorderly meetings," &c. This is the first notice of a nine 
o'clock bell upon the Connecticut River. — In Springfield, in 1653, 
Richard Sikes was to have one shilling for ringing the bell for 
marriages and funerals. The records of the other old towns 
upon the river, do not notice the ringing of a bell at marriages or 

In the old towns in Hampshire county and elsewhere, the turret 
for the bell was in the center of the four sided roof, and the bell 
rope hung down in the broad isle, where the ringer stood. It 
must have been so at Hadley. The minister always had the bell 
rope before him.* 

Mr. John Russell, Jr., the first minister of Hadley, was born in 
England. He graduated at Harvard College in 1645. There 
had been only thirteen graduates, previous to his class. He began 
to preach at Wethersfield, about 1649, and removed to Hadley 
in 1659 or 1660, where he died Dec. 10, 1692, in his 66th year. 

The engagers at first, and the people of Hadley afterwards, 
paid Mr. Russell 80 pounds per annum, but the records of Weth- 
ersfield and Hadley contain no agreement with him in regard to 
his salary. It was apparently 80 pounds, and he received allot- 
ments of land in Hadley, according to a 150;^ estate, or a home- 
lot of 8 acres, and about 38 acres of interval land. After some 

*Rev. Jonathan Edwards of Northampton, is said to have used few gestures in the pulpit, 
and to have looked much before him. After the rope was broken in the old meeting-house, 
one of his people observed, "Mr. Edwards has looked oj the bell rope." A bell rope form- 
erly came down in an aisle of some country churches in England. 


years, the town gave him, in addition, the use of the town allot- 
ment, so called, which was estimated at lo pounds, and he thus 
received annually 90 pounds. He and the people lived in peace 
and harmony, with mutual kindness and confidence until the 
latter part of his life, when a difference between him and a major- 
ity of the town, in regard to the Hopkins School, produced un- 
pleasant feelings, and alienated some of his friends. After the 
final decision against the town, and in favor of the school trus- 
tees, in 1687, the town voted only 70 pounds per annum during 
the rest of his life, but he may have retained the use of the town's 
land and if so, he received annually 80 pounds. After the reduc- 
tion, no complaint from Mr. Russell, and no bickerings and con- 
tentions between him and the town, appear in the records. After 
his decease, his widow and sons claimed 40 pounds "for what 
was abated in the rate bills, several years, without Mr. Russell's 
consent," and the town voted 35 pounds, and the matter was 
adjusted to the satisfaction of both parties. 

There is no intimation in the records, that the town aided Mr. 
Russell in building his dwelling-house; nor does it appear that 
the people ever furnished him with fire-wood. The town assisted 
him to build an addition to his house in 1662. 

Mr. Russell at Wethersfield was ardent and resolute, and some- 
times indiscreet, and he had warm friends and powerful opposers. 
At Hadley, he appears to have been an active and faithful pastor. 
As a preacher, there is little known respecting him. He preached 
the Election Sermon at Boston, in May, 1665, from Psalms 
cxxii: 6. Most of his letters in this History were written in 
the time of the Indian war, and some in great haste. His firm- 
ness and decision of character are seen in his persevering efforts 
in favor of the Hopkins School. His fearlessness and constancy 
were manifested in his protection and concealment for many 
years, of two of the judges of King Charles I., Whalley and 
Goffe, whom he truly viewed as sufferers in the cause of civil 
liberty. New England people generally were friendly to the 
judges, and believed that Charles I. was justly sentenced to death, 
but not many would have been willing to hazard life and prop- 
erty by placing themselves in the dangerous situation of Mr. 

An inventory of the estate of Rev. John Russell was taken at 
Hadley, Jan. 10, 1693. His son. Rev. Jonathan Russell, of 
Barnstable, was admitted as administrator, in Suffolk county, 
Jan. 17, and a summary of the inventory, and a settlement of the 
estate, were recorded in the Boston Probate Office. After 


paying the debts, funeral charges, expense of tomb-stones for Mr. 
Russell and a former wife, and delivering to his widow, Phebe 
Russell, 106;^, most of which she brought with her, there remained 
for the two sons, Jonathan and Samuel, .^830, of which, 305;^ in 
real estate was subject to the widow's dower. The appraisement 
was considerably above money prices. Mr. Russell's kindness 
to the judges did not diminish his estate. In the inventory, are 
three negroes, — a man, woman and child, valued at 6o;{^.* 

Salary of Mr. Russell and others. — The salary of Mr. Russell 
was paid in winter wheat at 3s. 3d., peas at 2s. 6d., Indian corn 
at 2s., and other things proportionally. The cash price of wheat 
did not exceed 2s. 6d., peas 2s., and corn is. 6d. per bushel at 
Hadley. Yet the sum of 90;^, or even 8o;^, as Mr. Russell re- 
ceived it, was an adequate and honorable salary, and so esteemed. 
He educated two sons and left a good estate. 

The salaries of ministers in the agricultural towns of New 
England, in the 17th century, were paid in produce, or "provision 
pay," at prices much above money prices, and nearly all debts 
were paid in the same manner. Gold and silver were uncommon 
in country towns, money contracts were seldom made, and cash 
prices were not often mentioned. The salaries of ministers did 
not average 60 pounds or 200 dollars, if estimated in money at 
6 shillings to a dollar; and in small towns, they did not exceed 
150 dollars. But ministers commonly had from their people 
a farm or other lands, a house and fire-wood, and with the frugal, 
economical habits of those days, they had usually a good support. 
Mr. Chauncey, the successor of Mr. Russell, had a salary of 8o;^ 
in "provision pay," which he exchanged in 17 13 for bo£, or 200 
dollars in money, and the money was province bills. The salary 
of the first two ministers of Hatfield was (io£ in produce, equal 
to about 150 dollars in money. f 

Several of the early churches of New England had two minis- 
ters, one ordained as pastor, and the other as teacher. North- 
ampton procured Mr. Joseph Eliot as teacher, but the people 
soon grew weary of the expense of supporting two ministers, and 
he removed to Guilford. The first settlers of Hadley intended 
to have as a second minister, Mr. Samuel Hooker, and he signed 

*Mr. Russell and some other good men were interested in the detestable system of slavery, 
in an age when its injustice and wickedness had not been properly considered. 

■j-Northampton gave to Rev. Eleazar Mather a salary of 8o£ in 1658, and Pres. Dwight, 
who had not examined the old currency of New England, represents this as 80 pounds ster- 
ling. (Travels in N. E., Vol. I., p. 344.) This is a mistake. It was paid ingrain and the 
value was not more than 60;^ in Massachusetts pine tree money. There never was a sterling 
currency in these towns. 


the engagement to remove. He changed his mind, and was 
ordained at Farmington, Nov. 6, 1661. He acted wisely for 
himself and for the people of Hadley. On the 26th of April, 
1662, Hadley voted to give a teaching elder 80 pounds a year. 
This is the last notice about a second minister. 

The church of Hadley is the oldest in the old county of Hamp- 
shire, except that of Springfield. It is not known when the church 
of Hadley began, but it is a year or more older than that of North- 
ampton. The church of Northampton was formed and Mr. 
Mather ordained, June 4, 1661; and there were present, as mess- 
engers from the church of "Hadleigh," Mr. John Russell, the 
pastor, Mr. Goodwin and Goodman White. 

Those who had withdrawn from the Hartford church, could 
not orderly unite with the Wethersfield members, till some time 
after the council in Boston in October, 1659. Perhaps there was 
no regular church at Hadley till 1660. The Hartford members 
were the most numerous. 

The first Ruling Elder of the church of Hadley was William 
Goodwin, who had previously held the same office at Hartford. 
He was an able and efficient man. He died at Farmington, 
March 11, 1673. No successor is noticed in the Hadley records. 
Nathaniel Dickinson and Peter Tilton were the first deacons of 
Hadley church. They were intelligent and influential men. A 
large portion of the heads of families on the east side of the river 
were members of the church, and there is reason to believe 
that they were generally pious and excellent men and women. 
Many of the men were qualified for public business. 

The recorders of Hadley and of some other towns were 
sparing of religious titles in the 17th century. Mr. Russell has 
not the title of Rev. during his life in the Hadley records. Mr. 
always precedes his name. The elders and deacons are seldom 
distinguished as such. When a man had a military and religious 
title, the former was commonly used. 

The dwelling-house of the Rev. Samuel Hopkins, the fourth 
minister of Hadley, was burnt in the night of March 20-21, 1766, 
and all the church records were destroyed. They must have 
contained a great deal of information in regard to ecclesiastical 



The Grammar School or Hopkins School* — Schools of New England — Grammar Schools — 
Free Schools — Instruction of Females — Schools and Scholars in Hadley — School Houses 
— School-masters — School Books. 

Edward Hopkins, Esq., after residing some years at Hartford, 
returned to England, and died in March, 1657. By his will, 
made March 17th, he gave a portion of his estate in New England 
to Theophilus Eaton, Esq., and Mr. John Davenport of New 
Haven, and Mr. John Cullick and Mr. William Goodwin of 
Hartford, to be disposed of by them "to give some encouragement 
in those foreign plantations for the breeding up of hopeful youths, 
in a way of learning, both at the Grammar School and College, 
for the public service of the country in future times." He also 
ordered that 500;^ more should be made over into the hands of 
the trustees, in six months after the death of his wife. 

Rev. John Davenport of New Haven and Mr. William Good- 
win of Hadley, the only surviving trustees, made a distribution 
of Mr. Hopkins's donation in April, 1664. They gave 400 pounds 
to the town of Hartford, for a Grammar School; and all the rest 
was to be equally divided between the towns of New Haven and 
Hadley, to be improved in maintaining a Grammar School in 
each, but they provided that 100 pounds of that half which Had- 
ley had, should be given to Harvard College. When the money 
was received, New Haven had 412, Hartford, 400, Hadley, 308, 
and Harvard College, 100 pounds — in all, 1220 pounds. Mrs. 
Hopkins lived until 1699, and the gift of 500 pounds was obtained, 
not by the schools of New Haven and Hadley, to which it belonged, 
but by Harvard College and Cambridge Grammar School, in 

On the 14th of January, 1667, the town made the following 
grant of land and, on the 14th of March, appointed a committee 
to let it. 

"The town have granted to and for the use of a Grammar School in this town of Hadley 
and to be and remain perpetually to and for the use of the said school, the two little mead- 
ows, next beyond the brook commonly called the Mill brook, and as much upland to be laid 
to the same as the committee chosen by the town, shall in their discretion see meet and need- 
ful; provided withal, that it be left to the judgment of said committee, that so much of the 
second meadow shall be excepted from the said grant, as that there may be a feasible and 
convenient passage for cattle to their feed." Committee chosen: Mr. Clarke, Lt. Smith, 

♦The History of the Hadley Grammar School was written in 1847, but is now, 1857, 
reduced more than half. I found many of the original papers of the school in a lawyer's 
office in Northampton. 


Wm. Allis, Nathaniel Dickinson, sr. and Andrew Warner. — -Note on the margin by Peter 
Tilton: — "These two meadows, are one the round neck of land; and [the other] the little 
long meadow that was reserved by the Indians in the first sale and afterwards purchased by 

These two School Meadows adjoin the Connecticut and are 
separated by high upland which becomes narrow in the northern 
part. On this elevated ridge, the Indians had a fort and burying- 
place. One meadow is east of the ridge; the other is west of it 
in a bend of the river, and is greatly enlarged by the encroachment 
of the river upon Hatfield. Both were estimated at 60 acres in 
1682. They now (1847) contain with the upland, more than 
140 acres. 

On the 20th of March, 1669, Mr. Goodwin proposed to the 
town, that he would choose three persons, and the town should 
choose "two more able and pious men;" and that these five with 
himself as long as he lived, should have the full dispose and 
management of the estate given by the trustees of Mr. Hopkins, 
and of all other estate given by any donor, or that may be given, 
to the town of Hadley for the promotion of literature and learning; 
the five persons to remain in the work till death or the Providence 
of God remove any of them, and then the survivors shall choose 
others in their place. Mr. Goodwin desired that the school might 
be called Hopkins School. On the 26th of March, he informed 
the town that he had chosen Mr. John Russell, Jr., Lieut. Sam- 
uel Smith and Aaron Cooke; and the town voted as follows: — 

The Town voted their approbation of Mr. Goodwin's choice. The town also voted 
Nathaniel Dickinson, sr. & Peter Tilton to join with the three persons beforementioned, as 
a joint Committee who together with Mr. Goodwin while he lives, and after his death, shall 
jointly & together have the ordering & full dispose of the estate or estates given by Mr. 
Davenport and Mr. Goodwin, (as trustees as aforesaid to Mr. Edward Hopkins) to this 
town of Hadley, or any other estate or estates that are or may be given either by the town 
itself or any other donor or donors, for the use, benefit, maintenance & promoting of a 
Grammar School to & for the use & in this town of Hadley; as also jointly & together to 
act, do, conclude, execute & finish any thing respecting the premises faithfully & according 
to their best discretion. 

Voted also by the town that as to the five persons before expressed, if any decease or be 
otherwise disabled through the Providence of God, the rest surviving shall have the sole 
choice of any other in the room and place of those surceasing, to the full number of five 
persons, provided they be known, discreet, pious, faithful persons. 

Mr. Goodwin, with the consent of the other trustees, built 
from the Hopkins donation, a grist-mill upon Mill River, a little 
south of the school lands. No record is found of the year in 
which the mill is built, nor of any grant by the town of the use 
of the stream. A houselot for the miller was granted Oct. 16, 
1671. Perhaps the mill was built that year. It was burnt by 


the Indians in September, 1677, with the miller's house, the farm 
barn, fences and other property. The trustees of the school 
declined to rebuild, not having sufficient means, and apprehend- 
ing danger from the Indians. The town needed a mill, and as 
Robert Boltwood was not afraid of Indians, a majority of the 
trustees were induced to dispose of the right belonging to the 
school, to the town for 10 pounds; and the town, to encourage 
Boltwood to build a mill, granted to him the mill-place and the 
remains of the dam, Nov. 6, 1677, and they granted four acres as 
a houselot for the miller, June 3, 1678. The mill was rebuilt by 
Boltwood, in 1678 or 1679. 

Mr. Russell, always solicitous for the prosperity of the Grammar 
School, did not consent to the sale of the mill-place and dam; and 
on the 30th of March, 1680, he presented to the County Court 
at Northampton, the state of the school, and what had been done 
by the other trustees, the town and Boltwood. The Court decided 
that the sale by the trustees was illegal. "We may not allow so 
great a wrong." They judged that Goodman Boltwood should 
be repaid what he had expended, and that the mill should belong 
to the school. 

At the September Court, 1682, the committee of the Hopkins 
School rendered an account of the school estate. Mr. Goodwin, 
before his death, received from the Hopkins donation 308;^, 
from Thomas Coleman 5;^, Mr. Westwood 13;^ and Widow 
Barnard i£, making 328;^^. He and others expended £\']7..\\.if, 
for a house for the miller, a barn for the farm, fencing the farm 
or meadows before and after the war, loss on a house bought by 
Mr. G., paying a debt of Mr. Hopkins, &c., and the remainder 
of the 328;^ was expended in building the mill and dam, repairing, 
maintaining the school-master, &c. 

The school estate that remained, consisted of the school mead- 
ows, given by the town, estimated at 60 acres; 12 or 14 acres of 
meadow, (5 acres of it in Northampton meadow,) and his dwell- 
ing-house and one acre and a half from his homelot, given by 
Nathaniel Ward; 12 acres of meadow given by John Barnard; 
and 11^ acres of meadow given by Henry Clarke. 

The Boltwoods, father and son, were resolute men and tena- 
cious of their rights, but they did not like contention, and on the 
8th of August, 1683, Robert Boltwood agreed to surrender the 
mill and appurtenances to the school committee, and they were 
to pay him 138 pounds in grain and pork. They took possession 
about Nov. I, 1683. In the year 1684, they found that the town 
challenged some right to the stream and land, and there were 



Other difficulties, and they refused to consummate the bargain. 
The committee and Samuel Boltwood (his father Robert died in 
April, 1684,) referred the matter to John Pynchon and John Allis, 
and in consequence of their decision, March 30, 1685, the mill 
was delivered up to Samuel Boltwood, about May i, 1685. 

Serious troubles to Mr. Russell and the promoters of the Gram- 
mar School next arose from another quarter. As the donation 
of Mr. Hopkins was almost all dissipated, and the mill was in 
the hands of Boltwood, and the estate that remained was nearly 
all given by Hadley and by individuals of that town, the people 
concluded that the estate might as well be managed by the town 
for the use of an English School. Some of the most influential 
men were in favor of this course, especially Peter Tilton, who had 
resigned his office as trustee, and Samuel Partrigg, who still re- 
mained a trustee, and on the 23d of August, 1686, the following 
votes were adopted by the town: — 

"Voted by the town that all that estate of houses & lands bequeathed & given by any 
donor or donors in their last wills and testaments to this town of Hadley, or to a school in 
said town or to the promoting and furtherance of learning in said town, as the legacy of 
Nathaniel Ward, John Barnard, Henry Clark, gent, they look on said estate and donations 
to belong nextly to the town to be improved according tothe willof the testators; and therefore 
take it into their hands to manage, order & dispose tothe use of a school in this town of Hadley. 
— They had a full vote in the affirmative. 

"Voted by the town that Ens. Nash, Francis Barnard, Neh. Dickinson, Thos. Hovey & 
Samuel Barnard are a committee from the town to make demand of the school committee 
of all the produce, increase & rents of lands & estates abovesaid, and accruing thereto, 
which are at present in their hands undisposed." 

After these votes of the town, four of the school committee, viz., 
Mr. John Russell, Aaron Cooke, Joseph Kellogg and Samuel 
Porter, presented to the County Court at Springfield, Sept. 28, 
1686, the declining state of the Grammar School, and complained 
of some persons in Hadley who obstructed the management of 
the school. The Court ordered that the lands given by Hadley, 
and the donations of Hopkins, Ward, Barnard and Clarke, should 
be improved for the Grammar School, and not for an English 
School separate from the Grammar School. Mr. Pynchon sent 
a copy of the order to Mr. Russell, and wrote to him a letter, 
dated Oct. 2, 1686, in which he mentioned the difficulties he had 
to encounter in getting the order passed. The Court was com- 
posed of himself, William Clark of Northampton, and Peter 
Tilton. Mr. Partrigg was present and spoke in favor of Hadley. 

"I am heartily sorry, says Mr. Pynchon, that Mr. Partrigg is so cross in the business of 
the school: nothing will be done as it ought to be till he be removed, which I suppose the 
President and Council may do. It is too hard for the County Court to do anything. Mr. 
Tilton, fully falling in with him, is as full and strong in all his notions as Mr. Partrigg him- 
self, and it is wonderful that any thing passed. Mr. Clark, though a friend in the business 


yet wanted courage.* Mr. Tilton said it would kindle such a flame as would not be quenched. 
But if to do right, & secure the public welfare, kindle a flame, the will of the Lord be done.-|' 
To get the order passed, I was forced to declare that if Mr. Clark did not assent, I would 
[give leave to record it myself, j] But he concurred, the order being a little mollified. If 
Mr. Partrigg will obstruct, it is necessary that he be removed by the President and Council, 
who must do this business; we are too weak in the county court. I am full for it to leave 
all with the President, § and glad it is like to be in the hands of them who will powerfully 
order. I pray God the school may stand upon its right basis, and all may run in the old 

After the decision of the Court, Sept. 28, 1686, a paper was 
signed by those in Hadley who adhered to Mr. Russell and the 
Grammar School, and accepted the order of the Court. The 
signers were Samuel Gardner, John Ingram, Chileab Smith, John 

Preston, Joseph Kellogg, Samuel , Samuel Porter, senior, 

Aaron Cooke, William Marcum, Hezekiah Porter and widow 
Mary Goodman. These with Mr. Russell, made 12 persons in 
the minority. All the rest seem to have gone for the English 

Mr. Russell wrote to President Dudley, and he gave his opin- 
ion decidedly in favor of the Grammar School. Mr. Pynchon 
received an order from the President and Council, dated Oct. 
21, 1686, requiring him to examine the school affairs at Hadley 
and report. Mr. Pynchon came to Hadley, Nov. 18, and sent to 
Northampton for Capt. Aaron Cooke and Mr. Joseph Hawley. 
He desired a town meeting the next morning, that the town might 
depute some persons to give an account of the school affairs. A 
town meeting was ordered at sun a quarter of an hour high the 
next morning. II Capt. Cooke and Mr. Hawley came over. Mr. 
Tilton, Mr. Partrigg and others came as a committee from the 
town meeting, and were willing to discourse as friends, but not 
in obedience to the Council's order. The school committee were 
present and gave their reasons,** and the town's committeeff 

*Mr. Clark was in favor of the Grammar School, and at the same time, a friend of Tilton 
and Partrigg. 

•j-This is a noble sentiment of Pynchon; nearly equivalent to the old Latin, -fat justitia, 
ruat caelum. 

jThis seems to be the meaning, but it is difficult to read this part of the letter. 

§The despotic government of President Dudley, (soon followed by that of Andros,) was 
detested by most people in this part of the colony, yet some were willing to make use of it, to 
accomplish what they considered to be a good object. Doubtless the decision of the old 
Court of Assistants would have been similar to that of the President and Council. 

IJIt must have been a lively time in Hadley, when a town meeting was held at sun a quarter 
of an hour high in the morning. 

**The reasons why this estate should remain to support the Grammar School, are pre- 
served. They were drawn up by Mr. Russell, with many scripture references and quota- 

j^The town's committee were Mr. Tilton, Mr. Partrigg, Ens. Timothy Nash, Nehemiah 
Dickinson, Daniel Marsh and Thomas Hovey. 


read two or three long papers in reply. These things and many 
more are stated in a letter to the President and Council, dated at 
Hadley, Nov. 20, 1686, and signed by Pynchon, Cooke and Haw- 
ley. They request that some speedy course may be taken by 
the Council, "for quieting the hot and raised spirit of the people 
of Hadley." 

The letter of Pynchon, Cooke and Hawley to the President and 
Council, had the effect intended, and the following order was 
issued : — 

"By the Honorable, the President & Council of His Majesty's Territory & Dominion of 
New England, in America: 

Upon perusal of the return made by Major Pynchon & the committee for the affair of 
the Hadley school. The President & Council do order that the committee for Hopkins 
School be and remain the feofees of the Grammar School in the said town, and that Mr. 
Partrigg be, and is hereby dismissed from any further service in that matter. And that the 
said committee make report of the present estate of said Mr. Hopkins and other donations 
to the school (which having been orderly annexed to the Grammar School, are hereby con- 
tinued to that service,) unto the next county court of Hampshire, who are hereby empowered 
to supply the place of Mr. Partrigg with some other meet person in Hadley, And that the 
said court do find out and order some method for the payment of Boltwood's expenses 
upon the mUl, that the mill, farm and other lands given to the School may return to that 
public use. The President and Council hereby declaring it to be beyond the power of 
the town of Hadley or any other whatsoever to divert any of the lands or estate or the said 
mill stream, & the privileges thereof (which are legally determined to the said Grammar 
School,) to any other use whatsover. The President and Council judging the particular 
gifts in the town a good foundation for a Grammar School both for themselves and the 
whole country, and that the Grammar School can be no otherwise interrupted, but to be a 
school holden by a master capable to instruct children & fit them for the university — 

By order, 

ED. RANDOLPH, Secretary. 

Council House, Boston, December the 8th, 1686. 

At a new County Court, appointed by Andros, and held at 
Northampton, June 7, 1687, the order of the President and Coun- 
cil was read, and a petition and statement from the trustees of 
the school. Samuel Boltwood was summoned to appear and 
show cause why he detained the mill. He presented a paper 
giving a regular account of his father's building and selling the 
mill and of the award of Pynchon and AUis, which put the mill 
into his (Samuel Boltwood's) hands. Referring to the award, 
he says, "it seems rational, especially by those who profess relig- 
ion, to stand by what was done" or make good their bond. 
"What is my just right I plead for, and no other." 

The next day, June 8, the Court, after referring to the order of the President and Council, 
— Ordered those persons in Hadley who had taken the school estate into their hands for 
an English School, to return it speedily to the former committee, the feofees of the Grammar 
School, viz. Mr. John Russell, Aaron Cook, Joseph Kellogg, and Samuel Porter, to whom 
they added Chileab Smith, in the room of Samuel Partrigg, removed. They also ordered 
that Samuel Boltwood should deliver up the school mill and appurtenances to the same 
feofees, for the maintenance of the school. If the feofees and Boltwood could not agree as 


to what had been expended on the mill, by him and his father, the toll being considered, 
then Mr. John Allis and a man chosen by the feofees and another chosen by Boltwood were 
to give in their award & determine what Boltwood should have for the mill. 

The town yielded so far as to pass the following vote, Aug. 
29, 1687, which did not please the Court: — 

"Voted by the town that the lands seized and taken into their own hands with reference 
to an English School by their vote Aug. 23, 1686, wanting that formality in the seizure as 
might have been — the town do now let fall the said seizure, leaving said lands in the hands 
of the Committee called the School Committee as formerly, withall reserving a liberty to 
themselves and successors to make claim & plea according to law at any time for the future, 
for what may appear to be their right in the premises." 

The Court of Sessions sent the following letter to the Select- 
men of Hadley, March 7, 1688, to be communicated to the town. 
The members of the court were John Pynchon, John Holyoke, 
Joseph Hawley, Capt. Aaron Cooke of Hadley, Lieut. John Allis. 

Honored Friends 

Having had a sight of the vote of the town of Hadley of August 29, 1687, in way of 
compliance (as we suppose) with the advice of the Court of Sessions, held at Northampton, 
June 7, 1687, we judge meet to let you understand our sense of it, that it is far short of what 
we expected and advised to, being at best lean in itself, if not a justifying of yourselves in 
your former precipitant, illegal entering upon the school estate, rather than a delivering it 
up to the committee as you were directed actually to do, and forthwith to declare it under 
the hands of those that had acted in entering thereon; and presuming upon your readiness 
so to do it, we proposed it to the committee or feofees, if they saw cause to allow one half 
of the i6£ that was engaged toward a school master. But what you have done being so 
short of that directed to, & so worded as speaks your unsubjection to authority, especially 
in conjunction with your other actings, we must declare it no ways convenient the commit- 
tee should allow any part of the said i6£ & that you are accountable for your perverseness 
towards the school affairs, & for your slighting of such who have more regard to your own 
good & interest than yourselves. Such a spirit we see breathing forth from you as will 
necessarily call for some further animadverting thereon, if you do not retract some of your 
actings which we earnestly desire you to overlook and rectify. We would not particularize, 
and yet in way of caution to amendment, might mention your unkindness and crossness in 
not granting the use of a house that stands empty and your illegal rating of the school estate, 
contrary to the declared direction in all our books, of colleges, schools, hospitals, &c. are 
not to be taxed, which we do particularly insist on, for your speedy rectification of what you 
have disorderly done (that we may not have occasion to lay it before his excellency.) Sev- 
eral other things are before our consideration, which we do not mention, hoping and expect- 
ing you will revise your own actings & amend, which is the [scope] of these lines to prevent 
any thing that may prove uncomfortable to yourselves, being assured that a sense of your 
own crossness, perverseness, unsubjection to order, & repentance for what is done amiss, 
will but become yourselves, and is the plainest path to your own comfort, which we pray 
God to direct you in, and are 

Your assured friends. 

We let you know & hereby declare that we forbid the constables and all officers from 
levying or collecting any particular tax toward any town affair, upon the school estate. 
Springfield March 7, 1687-8. 

By order of this Session, 

[Cornish was Clerk under Andros.] 


The selectmen of Hadley replied to this letter, and in June, 1688 
the Court sent another to Hadley, "enjoining them to seek their 
own peace." 

Samuel Boltwood gave up the mill to the trustees of the school 
in 1687, and arbitrators decided April 26, 1688, that he should 
be allowed 71;^ los. for what his father and he had expended 
about the mill, of which sum he had received all but nine pounds. 

The bitter controversy was now at an end, and in a few years, 
a good degree of harmony prevailed in the town. Peter Tilton 
and Samuel Partrigg were restored to public favor as soon 
as the arbitrary government of President Andros and Coun- 
cil at Boston was overthrown. Sam.uel Partrigg removed to 
Hatfield in 1687. He had been conspicuous in the English 
School party, and his conduct had been very offensive to Mr. 
Pynchon, and to Mr. Russell and those who acted with him. 
He was a powerful man, and his sway in the county of Hamp- 
shire, after Mr. Pynchon's death, was greater than that of any 
other man, for many years. 

There is no reason to condemn the motives of those concerned 
in these unpleasant contentions. The Grammar School was a 
favorite object with Mr. Russell, and he probably looked forward 
to a more elevated literary institution. His efforts for the school 
were constant and untiring. The people of Hadley are not cen- 
surable, because they judged it inexpedient to sustain a Gram- 
mar School after the Hopkins donation was almost all consumed 
or scattered. They had not families enough to require such a 
school under the law. 

When the people of the town accepted the propositions of Mr. 
Goodwin, March 26, 1669, and used the expression, "a grammar 
school to and for the use and in this town of Hadley," they seem 
not to have intended to give up their land to support a school for 
other towns. 

Schools of New England. — By a law of Massachusetts, passed 
in November, 1647, it was ordered that every town with fifty 
families should provide a school where children might be taught 
to read and write; and that every town with a hundred families 
or householders, should provide a grammar school, the master 
thereof being able to instruct so far as to fit young men for col- 
lege. Connecticut adopted this school law in nearly the same 
words. There were previously many schools in these colonies, 
but this was the first law requiring them. By a law of 1642, 
selectmen were to look after the children of parents and masters 
who neglected to train them up "in learning and labor." The 


Puritans, before 1647, rne^"t that every child should be taught 
to read, at home or at school, and be able to read the Bible. 

Grammar Schools. — In England, the distinct object of a gram- 
mar school was instruction in Greek and Latin, especially in 
Latin. All the scholars were expected to learn Lily's Latin 
Grammar. The custom of forcing all to learn the rudiments of 
Latin, was strongly opposed by John Locke. 

New England grammar schools, with few exceptions, were 
Latin and English schools united. Some scholars were fitted 
for college, but perhaps nine-tenths were confined to English 
studies. Children were generally taught to read, at least in the 
primer, before they were sent to these schools. English Gram- 
mar was not taught in the grammar schools of Old or New 

Free Schools. — The law of 1647 ^'^ "^^ direct that schools 
should be free. In the towns upon Connecticut River and else- 
where, schools were commonly supported partly by the parents 
of the scholars and partly by the town. Schools were not main- 
tained wholly by towns, till after much discussion and agitation. 
Those in moderate circumstances, with large families, desired 
free schools. Some of the wealthy and of those with no children 
to send, were opposed to them. Few towns were willing to vote 
for schools entirely free to the scholars, till after 1700, and it was 
many years after 1700, before free schools became general in 

Instruction of females. — The laws of the colony, and the votes 
of towns, relating to schools, used the word "children," and did 
not exclude females, yet it is abundantly evident that girls did 
not ordinarily continue to attend the town schools, many years, 
in the old towns. There was no controversy on the subject; it 
seems to have been considered unnecessary that girls should be 
instructed in public schools; and it may have been deemed im- 
proper for boys and girls to attend the same school, as it still is 
in England, except among the poor. 

There were many cheap, private schools in Massachusetts and 
Connecticut, in the 17th and i8th centuries, kept by "dames" 
in their own rooms where girls were instructed to read and sew, 
and in some, small boys were taught to read. Children who did 
not attend school, were taught to read at home, and nearly all 
could read, females as well as males. Writing was considered 
much less important, and it was not judged necessary that females 
in common life should learn to write; and indeed the ability to 
write, would have been of little use to them, in former days. 


Probably not one woman in a dozen could write her name, 150 
years ago; and much later, at the time of the revolution, very 
many of those wives and mothers whose patriotism is so justly 
praised, could not write, but they could read. Some men of 
several generations made their mark. 

A few girls were sent to the public schools in Northampton and 
Hatfield before 1680, and undoubtedly in most other towns. 
Records do not show why or when they ceased to attend. Per- 
haps they did not cease in all places. Some of the newer towns, 
settled in the last century, were more liberal in schooling the girls 
than the old ones. School dames were sometimes paid by the 
town. Many of the old towns were long remiss. Boston did 
not permit females to attend the public schools till 1790, and 
Northampton did not admit them into the town schools till 1802! 
It was an unheard of thing for girls to be instructed by a master, 
in Ipswich, till about 1769. They learned to read and sew of 
school dames. 

Schools and Scholars in Hadley. — The first recorded vote of 
Hadley respecting a school, was April 25, 1665, when the town 
voted "to give 20 pounds per annum for three years, towards the 
maintenance of a school-master, to teach the children, and to be 
as a help to Mr. Russell, as occasion may require." Caleb Wat- 
son seems to have been the first school-master. He was here in 
January, 1667, and probably came in 1666. 

On the 2 1 St of December, 1676, the town voted to give the 
school-master 30 pounds per annum, a part from the school estate, 
and the rest from the scholars and town. There being great fail- 
ure in sending children to school, the selectmen were ordered to 
take a list of all children from 6 to 12 years old; all of these were 
to attend the school, and if any did not go, they were to pay the 
same as those that went, except some poor men's children. Jan. 
10, 1678, they voted to give Mr. Younglove 30 pounds for another 
year, to be paid by the school estate, scholars and town ; and he was 
to have the use of the house and homestead belonging to the school, 
and of twelve acres of land. Male children from 6 to 12 were to 
pay 10 shillings a year if they went, and five shillings if they did 
not go. Feb. 7, 1681, a committee was appointed to get a school- 
master to teach Latin and English; to give him 30 pounds a year. 
Latin scholars to pay 20 shillings a year, and English scholars 
16 shillings. Those from 6 to 12 that did not go, were to pay 8 
shillings a year. 

This school was far from being a free school, and the votes 
indicate that the girls and some of the boys did not attend. On 


the first of March, 1697, "the town voted that there should be a 
constant school in Hadley; the teacher to be paid wholly by the 
school committee and the town rate." This was a free school, 
but it did not continue. Men who had no children to send, were 
dissatisfied, and the town voted, March 30, 1699, that one-half of 
what the school estate did not pay, should be paid by scholars. 
This was to stand 20 years. 

The Hopkins School was apparently the only public school in 
the old parish of Hadley, for more than a century, except a school 
for boys and girls voted in 1760 for that year. It was the com- 
mon town school. The master, with rare exceptions, was a man 
of collegiate education, and he instructed some in Greek and 
Latin, but most only in reading, writing and arithmetic. When 
Hadley had 99 families, in 1765, there was but one town school. 
The number of children taught by school dames is not known. 

School Houses. — Nathaniel Ward, who died in 1664, gave a 
piece of his homelot on the street, with his house, for the use of 
the school. A part of this building was used for a school-house 
many years. After 1688, a room was hired for the school. In 
1710, the Ward house was said to be "ready to fall down," and 
in 1 712, the school committee, having obtained leave from the 
Court, leased the school homelot of one acre and a half, with the 
buildings, to Doct. John Barnard, for 97 years, at 18 shillings a 

The town voted, July 13, 1696, to build a school-house, 25 by 
18 feet and 7 feet between joints, to be set in the "middle of the 
town." This was the first school-house built in Hadley. It 
stood in the broad street. 

From 1666 to 1725. 

A few of the teachers are not known. 

About 1666 to 1673. Caleb Watson, a graduate of Harvard College in 1661. A native 
of Roxbury. [He removed from Hadley to Hartford, where he was many years a distinguished 
teacher. Salary not known. 

About 1674 to 1 680. John Younglove, from Ipswich; was a preacher first at Quabaug, 
and after he left Hadley, at SufEeld. Salary, 2o£ and use of house and land. 

1682 and 1683. Samuel Russell, H. C. 1681. Son of Rev. John Russell. Was min- 
ister at Branford, Conn. 

1685. Samuel Partrigg of Hadley. 3 months. 

1686-7. Warham Mather, H. C. 1685. Son of Rev. Eleazar Mather of Northampton. 
Was Judge of Probate at New Haven. 

1688-9. John Younglove again. 6 months. 

1689-90. Thomas Swan, H. C. 1689. From Roxbury. He was Register of Probate in 
Middlesex. 6 months. 

1693-4. John Morse, H. C. 1692. From^Dedham. Was minister at Newtown, L. I. 
He kept school near a year, 

1694-5. Salmon Treat, H. C. 1694. Son of James T. of Wethersfield. Was minister 
at Preston, Conn. Kept a year. Wages, 39£. 


1695-6. Joseph Smith, H. C. 1695. ^°'* °^ Lieut. Philip S. of Hadley. Was minister 
at Upper Middletown. Kept 3 quarters, at rate of 38£. 

1696-7. John Hubbard, H. C. 1695. Son of John H. of Boston. Was minister of 
Jamaica, L. I. Kept one year at £30 as money. 

1698-9. John Smith, again. A year or more. 

1700-1. Samuel Melyen, H. C. 1696. Son of Jacob M. of Boston. Was minister at 
Elizabethtown, N. J. Kept one year. 38^. 

1701-2. Mr. Woodbridge. Either Ephraim or Samuel. Both graduated at Harvard 
College, lyoi. Both were ministers, i year. 38^. 

1702-3. Nathaniel Chauncey, Yale College 1702. Son of Rev. Nathaniel C. of Hatfield. 
Minister at Durham, Conn. 3 months. 

1703-4. Samuel Ruggles, H. C. 1702. From Roxbury. Was minister at Billerica. 
Kept 8 months, at rate of ^o£. 

1705-6. Samuel Mighill, H. C. 1704. Son of Rev. Thomas M. of Scituate. A teacher 
in Mass. and Conn. Died in South Hadley, 1769. i| year, at ^o£. 

1706-7. Jonathan Marsh, H. C. 1705. Son of Jonathan M. of Hadley. Was minister 
at Windsor, Conn, i year. 2°£ ^s money. 

1707-8. John Partridge, H. C. 1705. Son of Col. Samuel P. of Hatfield. Died 1717. 
I year. 40^. 

1708-9. Aaron Porter, H. C. 1708. Son of Samuel Porter, Esq. of Hadley, Was 
minister at Medford. Kept 6 months, at the rate of j^o£. 

1709-10. Daniel Boardman, Y. C. 1709. Son of Daniel Boreman of Wethersfield. 
Was minister at New Milford, Conn. Kept 8 months, at the rate of 26j;£ as money. 

1710-11. John James. A native of England. Honorary degree at H. C. 1710. He 
had previously been minister at Derby, Conn. 6 months, at the rate of 26|£ as money. 

17H-12. Elisha Williams, H. C. 171 1. Son of Rev. Wm. W. of Hatfield. Was Pres- 
ident of Yale College. 1 1 months, at the rate of 2,()^£ as money. 

1712-13. Thomas Berry, H. C. 1712. Was a physician. Lived at Ipswich. 6 months, 
at the rate of 30^ in money. 

1713-14. Stephen Williams, H. C. 1713. Son of Rev. John W. of Deerfield. Was 
minister at Longmeadow. i\ year, at the rate of 34^ in money. 

1714-15. Ebenezer Gay, H. C. 1714. From Dedham. Was minister at Hingham. 
9 months, at the rate of 26£. 

1705-16. Nathaniel Mather, Y. C. 1 71 5. Son of Rev. Samuel M. of Windsor, Conn. 
Minister at • — — . Kept 4 months. 

1716-18. "Mr. Chauncey's son." If he was son of Rev. Isaac C. of Hadley, he was 
only 16 to 18 years old. i§ year, at the rate of 36^. 

1718-19. Stephen Steel, Y. C. 1718. Son of James Steel of Hartford. Was minister 
of Tolland, Conn, i year. 4o£. 

1719-20. Solomon Williams, H. C. 1719. Son of Rev. Wm. W. of Hatfield. Was 
minister at Lebanon, Conn, i year. 40/]. 

1720-21. Hezekiah Kilburn, Y. C. 1720. He was born at Wethersfield and resided 
there. 1 year. 4o£. 

1721 to 1723. Daniel Dwight, Y. C. 1721. Son of Nathaniel D. of Northampton. 
Episcopal minister at Charleston, S. C. i\ year, at 40^ a year. 

1723-24. Benjamin Dickinson, H. C. 1723. Son of Nathaniel D. of Hatfield. A 
preacher many years. Lived in Hadley. 1 year. 40j(j. 

1724-25. Israel Chauncey, H. C. 1724. Son of Rev. Isaac C. of Hadley. He was an 
able preacher, but became deranged, and was burnt to death in a small building, near his 
father's, Nov. 1736. Kept f of a year, at the rate of 40^. 

In March, 1743, Josiah Pierce, H. C. 1735, a native of Woburn, began to keep the Gram- 
mar School. He was to instruct in reading, writing, arithmetic, Latin and Greek. He 
kept 12 years to 1755, and again 6 years from 1760 to 1766. His pay was 27^^ in N. E. 
currency, or 91 dollars, and he had the use of 25 acres of meadow land. 

These teachers were almost all educated at college, and they 
generally began to teach soon after they graduated. Their year 
or less time in the school, commonly .ncluded a part of two years. 


Their yearly salary to 1709 was from 38 to 40 pounds payable 
in produce at the usual prices, or T,o£ at money prices. After 
1709, their wages were paid in province bills, commencing with 
26§ pounds per annum, and increasing to 40 pounds, after the 
bills depreciated. Out of this salary or wages, they paid for 
their board, which was 4s. 8d. to 5s. per week when the salary 
was about 40;^, and 3s. 6d. to 3s. 9d. when the salary was 30;^ or 
less. After deducting the board, these young men received only 
18 to 21 pounds or 60 to 70 dollars, per annum, in any thing equiv- 
alent to dollars at six shillings. Northampton gave to her Gram- 
mar School masters, who were all educated men, only 80 dollars 
a year and board, down to the Revolution. Almost all were 
single men in both towns. Mr. Pierce's compensation was greater. 

If half the accounts of tyranny and cruelty of English school- 
masters, given by English writers, are to be believed, they were an 
entirely different class of men from the school-masters of New 
England. Records and traditions furnish no evidence of the 
cruelty or profligacy of any of the old school-masters on Connect- 
icut River. Where can more worthy men be found than those 
composing the list of Hadley school-masters .? 

In 1682, Mr. Samuel Russell taught the school six months for 
15;^. About 50 scholars attended and paid 4 shillings each, 
except a few that paid 6 shillings. He received from the scholars 
;^io, 14s. and from the school committee, £^, 6s. 

For a few years after 1677, there was fear of Indians, and the 
School meadows were not fenced till 1680. They were let out in 

1 68 1. The rent from 1684 to 1700 was generally from 6 to 8;^, 
when paid in produce at money prices. From 1704 to 1706, it 
was ;^8, I2s. as money. In 1720, the number of acres was said 
to be 80. The school land in other meadows, about 36 acres, 
was leased at 4, 5 or 6 shillings per acre, according to quality, 
when paid in produce at the usual prices; or from one-quarter to 
one-third less, if paid in any thing equivalent to money. 

Hadley School Committee for 50 years. — In 1669, the first five 
were Mr. John Russell, Jr., Lieut. Samuel Smith, Aaron Cooke, 
Jr., Nathaniel Dickinson, Peter Tilton. As vacancies occurred, 
others were chosen, viz., Philip Smith, 1680, Samuel Partrigg, 

1682, Samuel Porter, 1685, Joseph Kellogg, 1686, Chileab Smith, 
1687, Thomas Hovey, Samuel Porter, Esq., Sergt. Joseph Smith, 
Deac. John Smith. The last five were the committee in 1720. 

In new towns, where they had few families and no school, it 
was considered the duty of parents to teach their children to read. 
In September, 1677, Goodman Lancelot Granger of Suffield, 


was presented to the Hampshire Court for the neglect of learning 
his children to read. He appeared at March Court, 1678, and 
declared he was using the means to learn them to read, and 
promised to do his best, and he was discharged. When a Hamp- 
shire town was without a school a number of months, it was pre- 
sented to the Court, and two or three towns in the southern part of 
the county were fined for their neglect. 

It was ordered by a law of 1642,* that the selectmen of every 
town, should see that none of their brethren and neighbors should 
"suffer so much barbarism, in any of their families as not to en- 
deavor to teach by themselves or others, their children and ap- 
prentices perfectly to read the English tongue," and to have 
knowledge of the capital laws, upon penalty of 20 shillings. 
This law was ordered to be enforced in 1668. 

At New Haven, in 1684, the Grammar School was to be kept 
9 hours in a day in summer, (less in winter,) and 6 days in a week. 
Two hours in the afternoon of Saturday were to be employed in 
catechising the scholars, — a practice in New England schools, 
that came down to the present century, in the forenoon of Sat- 

School Books. — The early school books of New England were 
the same with those of Old England. John Locke, in his 
"Thoughts concerning Education," 1690, says the method of 
schools in England, in teaching children to read, has been to 
adhere to "the ordinary road of the Hornbook, Primer,t Psalter, 
Testament and Bible." These, he says, are the only books used 
"to engage the liking of children and tempt them to read." The 
"ordinary road" was the same in New England, and the same 
books were used in Hadley and other towns. Such books were 
sold to the people by John Pynchon of Springfield, from 1656 to 
1672 and after, and by Joseph Hawley of Northampton, to his 
scholars, except Hornbooks, from 1674 to 1680, and both sold 
many Catechisms, and paper and paper books for writers. Neither 
sold Spelling-books, nor does John Locke refer to a Spelling-book 
in his treatise. They were but little used in the 17th century. 
Samuel Porter, of Hadley, who died in 1722, sold Primers, 
Psalters, Testaments and Bibles; also Catechisms, Psalm Books, 
&c. Spelling-books, chiefly Dilworth's, were gradually intro- 
duced; were not common on Connecticut River till after 1750. 
Arithmetic was taught, but the books were rare. Traders sold 
the Latin Accidence or Grammar. — Hornbooks do not appear in 

*This law is in the printed laws of 1672. 

•[Our Primer differed from the English one, but the use in school was similar. 


Hampshire after 1700. They contained the alphabet, with a 
few rudiments, on one page, covered, as Cowper says,- with "thin 
translucent horn," to keep them from being soiled. 

A book called a Primer has been used by children in schools 
for centuries. Our early Primers were imported from England, 
in 1644, 1655, &c. and were probably Puritan Primers. The 
New England Primer seems to have been published after the 
Restoration in 1660, and to have been fitted for a child's school- 
book. It has undergone many changes. The Catechism was 
formerly published by itself. 


Ordinary-keepers or Inn-keepers — Retailers of wine and liquors — Selling liquors to Indians 
— Trial of Dr. Westcarr — Drinks in the 17th century — Distilling — Aquavitae — Intem- 
perance in New England. 

When our fathers came from England, the people were addicted 
to malt liquors, the country was full of licensed ale-houses, and 
an alewife was a woman, and not a fish. Inns, taverns and ordi- 
naries were plenty. Distilled spirits were used, but wine and ale 
were the principal intoxicating beverages. The English were 
excessive drinkers, or as Shakespeare says, "most potent in pot- 
ting." "Drinking is the plague of our English gentry," says 
Peacham in 1622. "Drunkenness hath diffused itself over the 
nation," says Camden in 1617. 

The first planters of New England were some of the best portion 
of this wine-bibbing, ale-guzzling nation. They abhorred drunk- 
enness, and intended to be temperate drinkers, and they followed 
the English practice in licensing men to sell intoxicating drinks. 
As ale-houses were in bad repute in England, they avoided the 
appellation, and used the word ordinary, which in England sig- 
nified an eating-house. Our early inns in Hampshire were all 
denominated ordinaries. Inns were called ordinaries in Virginia. 

The people of Hadley, conscious of the evil effects of liquor 
houses, were in no haste to have an ordinary, and when the subject 
was agitated in January, 1663, they proceeded with great caution, 
choosing one committee of ten to consider the matter, and to 
report to another of seven, and the latter were to report to the 
town, who were to choose the most fit man to keep an ordinary. 
The town did not select a man, and the county book does not 
record the license of any one, until March, 1668, when Richard 
Goodman had his license "continued," showing that he was 


licensed in 1667.* After 1668, there is no notice of an inn or 
ordinary in Hadley or Hatfield for 24 years, but in Hadley, 
Joseph Kellogg, the ferry-man, had liberty to entertain travelers. 
Springfield and Northampton had houses of entertainment, for 
the courts were held in those towns, and the court-rooms were 
always in the ordinaries or inns. In March, 1666, Samuel Porter 
and William Lewis of Hadley, were both presented for selling 
strong liquors without license, and fined. It appeared that they 
were induced to do this, because no one in Hadley had liberty to 
sell liquors. 

In 1667 and 1668, Richard Goodman was licensed to sell wine 
and strong liquors; in 1671, Lieut. Samuel Smith was the next 
retailer in Hadley. In September, 1684, Deac. Philip Smith 
was licensed to sell wine to persons "in real need," meaning the 
sick. In March, 1678, Samuel Partrigg had liberty to sell liquors 
"to the neighbors," and in 1681, "for the helpfulnessf of 
neighbors." In 1685, he had liberty to retail wine, and he was 
afterwards a retailer of strong drink in Hatfield. The ordinary 
keepers and retailers, in those days, were very respectable men. 
Selectmen would not approve, nor the Court license, any other. 
John Pynchon was licensed to sell wine and strong liquors in 1671 ; 
the Court seem to have expected that he would reduc ethe price! 

In September, 1674, the Court that was sitting in the house of 
Nathaniel Ely, ordinary-keeper in Springfield, fined him 40 shil- 
lings, for not keeping beer that was according to law, viz., made 
with four bushels of barley malt to the hogshead, (63 gallons.) 
This beer which ordinaries were required to keep, was not so 
strong as much of the beer used in England. 

The first inn-keeper in Hadley after 1668, in the county rec- 
ords, was Hezekiah Dickinson in 1692 and 1693. Joseph Smith, 
cooper, was an inn-keeper in 1696. Luke Smith was a retailer 
in 1700 and an inn-keeper in 1701. Westwood Cooke was an 
inn-keeper from 1704 to 1707. Luke Smith was an inn-keeper 
most or all of the time from 171 1 to 1731, inclusive. No other 
inn-keeper or retailer in Hadley, is recorded in the county books 
that remain, during those 21 years. 

Selling intoxicating drinks to the Indians. — In consequence of 
the drunkenness of the Indians, "the fruits whereof were murder 

*In 1667, John Pynchon credited to Richard Goodman, for his "account of expenses 
at the General Training" and for other things, £8.2.0. There was a General Training in 
Hadley in 1667, and the officers were entertained by Goodman. 

•f-This kind of "helpfulness" has destroyed thousands of lives and millions of property, 
in Massachusetts. 


and other outrages," the General Court, in May, 1657, forbid all 
persons to sell or give to any Indian, rum, strong water, wine, 
strong beer, brandy, cider, perry, or any other strong liquors, 
under the penalty of 40 shillings for every pint so sold or given. 
The Courts in Hampshire county were prompt to punish infrac- 
tions of this law, and were sustained by almost all the people. 
There were a few persons who could not resist the temptation of 
exchanging spirits for wampum and beaver skins; and some- 
times a farmer or his wife thought there was no great harm in 
selling to the Indians, a few quarts of poor cider. The Indians 
were sure to be drunk whenever they could get liquor enough for 
that purpose. The following trial of Dr. Westcarr, and some 
other notices, are abridged from the county records: — 

In July, 1670, Doct. John Westcarr, of Hadley, was complained of by the Indians, for 
selling liquor to them. Capt. John Pynchon examined him and heard the witnesses. West- 
carr confessed that he had two barrels of liquor in the spring, and being asked what he did 
with it, said he used it for his own occasions and for neighbors who desired him to procure 
it. He refused to tell to whom he had sold any, yet it was all gone but half a cask. He 
said he used four or five gallons at a time in preparing medicines. 

Wequanunco testified that John Westcarr sold him two quarts of liquor in the spring 
when corn was so high (which, by his sign, was 2 or 3 inches.) Benjamin Wait* standing 
by, said in a deriding manner, may be it was 2 or 3 years ago. The Indian replied, "no, 
it was this spring; what I say is true; Homs (that is, an old man) will not lie. I paid for it 
in wampum after two fadom a quart; I paid in black wampum." The same Indian's wife 
testified that she saw Westcarr sell her husband two quarts of liquor. 

Tackquellawant testified that John Westcarr sells liquors to the Indians; "and about a 
month ago, I had four quarts of him and paid him a beaver skin. This is truth, and 
Chabattan and Wottellosin know it, and saw it." 

Chabattan appeared and said Tackquellawant had four quarts as he testified, of J. W. 
"I was with him and saw it, and saw him pay a beaver skin for it." 

Nuxco testified: — "I fetched liquors from John Westcarr when the Indians were drunken, 
and my wigwam was broken and spoiled by the drunken Indians this summer. I was 
before the Northampton Commissioners about it. I had sis and a half quarts of liquor of 
J. W. and paid him a great beaver skin of my wife's. I also fetched three quarts more, 
and paid him six fadom of wampum." Nuxco says it is a known trade among the Indians, 
that it's two fadom of wampum for a quart. 

Mr. Pynchon bound over Doct. Westcarr to the Sept. Court at Springfield, 1670. The 
preceding testimonies were read. Dr. Westcarr owned that the Indians so accused him. 
The Indians affirmed that Westcarr threatened to lay them in irons, if they told of him. 
He denied, but the Indians told him to his face that it was true and that they were afraid 
to speak all. Nuxco and Tackquellawant said he had feared [frightened] them so that they 
might not speak. Wamequam said Westcarr did so speak. Squiskhegan said Westcarr 
was angry with Mattawan, his son. Mattawan said J. W. told him the Indians were naughty 
for telling the Northampton Commissioners of his selling liquors, and J. W. took away his 
gun because of it. Doct. Westcarr here said he took the gun for debt. Mattawan said he 
owed him not a penny. Mattawan and Squiskhegan said J. W. lied, and that he took 
away the gun because Mattawan informed against him and he was angry. 

John Westcarr tendered to take his oath for his purgation, but the Court refused, and 
gave their reasons. The Court adjudged him guilty of selling at least 10 quarts, and fined 
him 4o£. He appealed to the Court of Assistants at Boston, and was bound in So£, and 
Francis Barnard and John Coleman in 40;^ each, as sureties. 

*B, Wait had also been complained of by the Indians and fined. 


In September, 167 1, it appeared that there had been no issue of the case at Boston, the 
bench and jury not agreeing. The County Court, as he had been at considerable expense 
and trouble, accepted his offer of five pounds, and the matter was settled. He had been 
fined 30;^ in 1667, for selling 15 pints of strong liquor to the Indians. In 1674, ^^^ Indians 
again accused him, and he was bound over by the Hadley Commissioners. At March 
Court, 1675, '^^ wished to be tried by the jury, except Lt. Smith and P. Tilton who had 
bound him over. He was tried by the other ten. The Indians did not appear. He put 
in his defence in writing, and John Smith of Hadley replied to it. The jury decided that 
he was "not legally guilty." 

In 1667, a man in Springfield was fined ;£i6 for selling four quarts of cider to the Indians. 
In 1672, another Springfield man was complained of for selling cider to the Indians. He 
said it was water-cider. As it was such that an Indian was probably made drunk by it, and 
did mischief, the Court fined him 40 shillings. In 1673, ^ Northampton woman was pre- 
sented for selling cider to the Indians. She appeared and acknowledged that she sold some 
sour cider mixed with beer. The Court fined her 45 shillings. 

In Sept. r670, the Court say: — "the woful drunkenness of the Indians cries aloud to use 
the utmost laudable means to prevent what may be of that sin among them." In Sept. 
1673, they say: — "the Indians are very often found drunk, and cross to all good order and 

The Indians in this valley were miserable, degraded beings, 
when these towns were settled, and it is evident that they did not 
become any better. The Connecticut Indians were similar. Ac- 
cording to the General Court of that colony in Oct. 1654, "the 
great and crying sin of drunkenness reigns amongst them." 
The Court attributed this to the sale of cider and strong beer to 
them, which had not been forbidden, and these were now pro- 
hibited as well as wine and spirits. Penalty, 5 pounds for every 
pint sold to an Indian. 

In Daniel Gookin's History of the Christian Indians, in 1677, 
he remarked — "A very little strong drink will intoxicate their 
brains; for being used to drink water, they cannot bear a fourth 
part of what an Englishman will bear." 

Drinks in the 17th century. — The early drinks in New England 
were wine of several sorts, comprising that called sack, beer, in- 
cluding ale, and strong water or aquavitae, which was of two 
kinds, viz., brandy distilled from wine, and a liquor made from 
malt or grain, and named usquebaugh. Wine and beer were the 
principal drinks, until rum was brought from the West Indies. 
Rum was called "kill-devil" by Josselyn, and the General Court 
of Connecticut, in 1654, termed it "Barbadoes liquor commonly 
called rum-kill-devil."* It was much cheaper than aquavitae 
from Europe, and its use became much more common. Strong 
beer was first made of imported malt, and in a few years, of malt 
from grain raised here. Much ordinary household beer was 

*This liquor was strangely misnamed. Instead of killing the devil, it has greatly extended 
and strengthened his kingdom. Josselyn called it a "cursed liquor." Aquavitae, which 
signifies, water of life, had also a very wrong name. 


made. Hops grew wild in the intervals of the Connecticut. 
After some years, cider was added to the beverages. The second 
Henry Wolcott, of Windsor, had an extensive nursery and orchard, 
and he began to sell cider in 1648, at 2s. 8d. per gallon; in 1650, 
the price was is. 8d. and in 1653, is. 4d. and 30 shillings a barrel. 
He also sold boiled cider. In 1678, cider in Northampton was 
ID shillings a barrel, and before 1700, 6 or 7 shillings. It was 
not very abundant, and beer was a more common drink than 
cider in the Hampshire towns until after 1700. New England 
rum, distilled from molasses, was added to the list of intoxicating 
drinks, about 1700. 

Other liquors, as mum, perry and metheglin, are noticed in 
New England in the 17th century. There were various prepa- 
rations of wines and spirits, as mulled wine, or wine burnt or 
stewed, and sweetened and spiced; and cherry rum or brandy, 
called cherry-bounce. Flip made of beer, sugar and spirits, 
appears near the close of the century, and punch not long after. 

Malt-houses were early established, and they continued in some 
of the villages on Connecticut River more than a century. John 
Barnard, who died in Hadley in 1664, had a malt-house in Had- 
ley, and another in Wethersfield, and was called "maltster." 
Andrew Warner hired his malt-house in Hadley, and it was burnt 
in 1665. He then built malt-works for himself, and was the 
maltster of Hadley-, and his son Jacob seems to have succeeded 
him. Francis Barnard had a malt-house. 

Distilling. — Small stills, often called limbecs, were common in 
England more than 230 years ago, and housewives distilled cor- 
dials, sweet waters and medicinal waters, from herbs, flowers, 
spices, &c. The early settlers of Massachusetts, in Boston and 
vicinity, had many of these small stills in their houses, which 
appear in their inventories, valued at from 15 to 45 shillings each. 
There were some at Hartford and Windsor. Several ministers 
had one of these little stills. Andrew Warner of Hadley, had a 
small still valued at 10 shillings, and Doct. Hastings of Hatfield, 
had one valued at 40 shillings. 

There were larger stills, and spirits were distilled in Massa- 
chusetts, Plymouth and Connecticut, from grain apparently, 
before 1662. This kind of distillation could not have been 
extensive, nor of long continuance. Henry Wolcott distilled 
something called brandy before 1680, perhaps from cider, but 
not much cider-brandy was made in New England till after 1750. 
Samuel Porter of Hadley, had a still and worm, in 1722, valued 
at 9 pounds. What was distilled in it, is unknown. 


Aquavitae was imported into New England in small casks, 
and in bottles packed in cases, perhaps like the gin-cases of later 
days. Such cases were brought to Hadley, and these bottles, 
probably from their shape, gave a permanent name to Aquavitae 
Meadow. John Barnard, in his will, in 1664, gave to a kinsman 
"my piece of land that lieth in the Nook, or Aquavita Bottle." 
The last word was not retained. The contents of these bottles 
were esteemed very precious, and Mary Barnard, widow of John, 
in her will, in 1665, gave to four friends "one glass of strong 
water" each, that is, one bottle of brandy each, and reserved 
other glasses for the use of sick and weak persons. — "Aqua- 
vitae" and "aquavitae bottle" are found in Shakespeare. 

Lechford, who wrote in 1642, says drunkenness was then rare 
in Massachusetts. Intemperance increased after the means of 
intoxication were more easily procured. There were many com- 
plaints in the 17th century, that some men spent their estates 
and impoverished their families, by excessive drinking. In Sam- 
uel Clough's New England Almanack for 1702, are the following 
lines, which doubtless give a correct description of a Boston bar- 
room, and of some in the country, 156 years ago: — 

Under December. 
"The days are short, the weather's cold, 
By tavern fires, tales are told, 
Some ask for dram when first come in, 
Others with flip or bounce begin." 

Under January. 
"Ill husbands now in taverns sit, 
And spend more money than they get, 
Calling for drink and drinking greedy, 
The' many of them poor and needy." 

Intemperance was more common in Boston and on the sea- 
board than in the agricultural towns, but Hampshire was not 
entirely free from intemperate drinking and its evil consequences. 
The County Court, in March, 1675, remark — "it is found by 
experience that there is too much idle expense of precious time 
and estate, in drinking strong liquors, by many of our youth and 
others in our towns." The Court ordered that retailers should 
sell only to governors of fam.ilies of sober carriage, "the intent 
being that such persons as have liberty to sell, should use their 
best to prevent a trade of drinking and drunkenness." — John 
Pynchon retailed brandy at the rate of 12 shillings per gallon in 
1653, and rum at 6s. to 6s. 8d. in 1673. He did not commonly 
retail wine and spirits, but when he had rum for sale, there was no 
lack of purchasers. Rev. Pelatiah Glover, the m.inister of Spring- 


field, bought of him about two gallons of rum, and six quarts of 
wine, in a year, from 1672 to 1675. Mr, Pynchon, at the raising 
of his mill-dam, in 1654, furnished wine and cakes to the amount 
of 13s. 6d. In Hadley, in 1665, the wine and cake at the funeral 
of John Barnard's widow, cost 40 shillings — a bad practice 
derived from England. When the Hadley School mill was raised 
in 1706, II quarts of rum at 4 shillings per gallon were used. As 
intoxicating liquors became more plenty, their use and pernicious 
effects became more common. 


Town Meetings — Townsmen's Accounts — Freemen — Town OfBcers — Pound — Town By- 
laws — Occupations of the people — Petitions of Hadley, in 1665, 1669 and 1670. 

The fathers of Hadley intended to have all business done in an 
orderly, methodical manner. In December, 1660, they voted 
that a moderator should be chosen at every town meeting, and 
when they chose Nathaniel Dickinson, to transcribe all town 
orders, they directed that the orders made by the town, should 
be read openly in the presence of the meeting, before it broke up. 
When Peter Tilton was chosen to record town orders, Sept. 1661, 
he was to receive two pence for each order, and he was to forfeit 
four pence for every order not recorded before the next meeting. 
Mr. Tilton was a systematic, well educated man. 

In January, 1662, the following regulations for town meetings were voted by the town — 
Warnings were to be accounted legal, when each inhabitant had had notice by telling him, 
or some of his family, or by leaving word at his house, at least the evening before the meeting; 
otherwise not legal. Every person not coming to the meeting within half an hour of the 
appointed time, was to forfeit 6 pence, and not coming within an hour, 12 pence, unless 
excused at the next meeting, after giving a rational plea for absence. If the major part of 
the voters did not appear within an hour, those present might go away and attend to their 
own occasions, but if a major part appeared, it was a legal meeting. "The townsmen 
before every town meeting shall choose one of themselves to be moderator, who shall have 
the ordering of the meeting, of speech and silence therein," and no person shall depart 
without leave of the moderator, under the penalty of 6 pence, "and being accounted as one 
that gives an evil example of disorder to others." All in the meeting were to direct their 
speech to the moderator, and "he to value and make answer thereto, until it be ripened for 
a vote; that so we may avoid personal jangling." [Abridged.] 

They also voted to choose Townsmen yearly in January, who should have power to order 
and transact all public occasions but the following: — Admitting inhabitants, giving of land, 
laying out highways, alienating fences and properties, erecting common buildinQ;s, as houses, 


mills, bridges, &c. of considerable value, levying of rates, and some other things. In all 
these, the townsmen must have the consent of the town. 

In 1662, the ^townsmen were to meet the first Monday of every other month, to consider 
matters that concern the town. — The proceedings of townsmen and selectmen were seldom 

There was no town Treasurer in those days, and no need of 
any. Rates were not levied in money, and town debts were not 
paid in money. The townsmen kept the accounts, and after 
their year was out, the new townsmen with two other persons 
appointed for that purpose, examined their accounts, and the 
result was recorded. The record of these audits for many years, 
may be seen in the town book. There was no Treasurer in Had- 
ley till some years after 1700. 

Richard Billings, of the west side, sued the agents of the town, 
in 1664, for witholding some of his land. He attended a town 
meeting, March 25, 1664, and offended them by his free and earnest 
speeches, and the town deliberately voted, "that the carriage of Rich- 
ard Billings at this present meeting, is offensive." He gained his 
cause at the next Court, and did not trouble himself about the 

Freemen. — By the early laws of Massachusetts, none but 
church-members could be freemen; and none but freemen could 
hold offices or vote for rulers. These regulations were modified 
in 1647 ^^^ 1658, and some non-freemen were allowed to vote 
in town affairs generally, and might hold town offices; and in 
1664, some who were not church-members could be freemen. In 
those days, town offices were burdensome and were avoided, and 
many members of churches, in order to exempt themselves from 
public service, would not be made freemen, and in 1647, ^ "^^ 
was made compelling such men to serve, if chosen, or pay a fine 
not exceeding 20 shillings. 

In Hadley, the distinction of freemen and non-freemen is 
seldom alluded to in the records. It is evident that town meet- 
ings were open to all, and that all came together and debated 
and voted freely, respecting town affairs. Only freemen voted 
for Magistrates or Assistants, County Commissioners and Treas- 
urer, and they chose deputies to the General Court. Their 
votes and choice are not recorded in the town book. 


And some appointed by others. 
Townsmen, were called Selectmen, after a few years. There were five from the beginning. 
They were chosen by the engagers, in November, 1659, in three places. They were chosen 
at Norwottuck, Dec. 14, 1660, viz., Andrew Bacon, Andrew Warner, Nathaniel Dickinson, 
Samuel Smith and William Lewis. The town of Hadley chose five Jan. 27, 1662, three 
from the east side and two from the west side. For a century after 1663, a selectman was 
very rarely chosen two years in succession. 


Raters or Rate-makers, viz., Samuel Smith, Nathaniel Dickinson and William Allis, were 
first chosen to make the rates, Dec. i6, 1661. For some years after, S. Smith, N. Dickinson 
and Peter Tilton were chosen. The raters were sometimes called assessors, before 1700, 
and commonly after 171 5. 

Auditors. — Two were chosen yearly, to unite with the new townsmen, in settling the 
accounts of the old ones. The first were William Partrigg and Peter Tilton, who were 
chosen Dec. 11, 1661, to audit, with the townsmen, all rates and accounts for two 
years past. 

Constables. — They took their oath before the County Court. Thomas Coleman was 
the first Constable of Newtown, March, 1661, and Stephen Terry was the first Constable of 
Hadley, March, 1662. William Partrigg, for east side, and Isaac Graves, for west side, 
were chosen Jan. 27, 1663. Substantial men were elected to this office. After Hatfield 
became a town, only one was chosen annually in Hadley, until 1704. 

The constable had many duties to perform, and in executing them, he carried a black 
staff, 5 feet long, tipped with brass. In Massachusetts, he was the collector of taxes or 

Town Recorder or Clerk. — Nathaniel Dickinson, who had before acted as recorder, was 
chosen to record town orders, Dec. 17, 1660; and Peter Tilton was chosen to record town 
orders, Sept. 4, 1661, and to record lands, Feb. 9, 1663. Mr. Tilton held the office 31 
years and a half. Samuel Barnard was chosen in 1693, and is the first that is called Clerk 
in the record. 

Sealer of Weights and Measures, was called in England, and sometimes in Massachu- 
setts, Clerk of the Market. John Barnard of Hadley was sworn by the County Court in 
1663, and William Partrigg in 1665. Joseph Smith, the cooper and miller, was chosen by 
the town, in 1696, and he was sealer many years, and was succeeded by his son Joseph. 

Hadley and Northampton were complained of to the Court, for not having standard 
weights and measures, Sept. 1664. They were allowed until the next March to get stand- 
ards. Hadley voted brass weights in 1707. 

In England, in the time of Elizabeth, according to Holinshed, many clerks of the market 
contrived to leave the measures too big or too little, in order to have another fee for repair- 
ing. Some dealers had one measure to sell by, and another to buy by, yet all sealed and 
branded. It was the same with weights. Poor tenants that paid their rent in grain to their 
landlords, were often dealt with very hardly. The "golden days" of Queen Elizabeth, 
furnish abundant examples of all kinds of dishonesty and wickedness. 

Commissioners to end small Causes. — By a law of the colory, the towns where no magis- 
trate dwelt, might request the County Court to appoint three Commissioners, to hear and 
determine causes, where the debt or damage did not exceed 40 shillings. A magistrate had 
the same power. The General Court appointed Commissioners for Hadley, in May, 1661, 
when the town was named, with unusual power, viz., Andrew Bacon, Samuel Smith and 
William Westwood. In April, 1662, the town chose the same men. In May, 1663, the 
General Court allowed Henry Clarke, Samuel Smith and Andrew Bacon to be commission- 
ers till the next September, and their extraordinary power was then to cease, and Hadley 
was to have commissioners to end small causes as other towns. The same three men, 
Clarke, Smith and Bacon, were sworn by the County Court, as commissioners for small 
causes, in Sept. 1663, and Bacon was continued until 1669, Clarke till 1675 and Smith till 
1678. Others were John White, Nathaniel Dickinson, Peter Tilton and Philip Smith. 
These town Courts ended with the first charter. 

Clerk of the Writs. — Every town might nominate a Clerk of the Writs, to be allowed by 
the shire Court, to grant summons and attachments in civil actions. They were to receive 
two pence for a warrant, three pence for an attachment, and four pence for a bond. The 
first Clerk of the Writs in Hadley, was John P.ussell, sr., appointed by the General Court, in 
May, 1661; no other is recorded until March, 1681, when Richard Montague was sworn by 
the County Court; Samuel Partrigg was sworn in 1682, and Samuel Barnard in 1686. 

Tithing-men, in Massachusetts, were first ordered in 1677. Hadley selectmen chose four, 
and they were approved by the County Court, in March, 1678, viz., Timothy Nash, Samuel 
Moody, Samuel Church, Chileab Smith. After 1680, they were chosen by the town, four 
for some years, and then only two. They were to inspect the conduct of liquor-sellers, 
Sabbath-breakers, night-walkers, tipplers, &c. and present the names of the disorderly to 
a magistrate. 


Surveyors of Highways were first chosen Jan. 27, 1663, viz., Edward Church and Chileab 
Smith, east side, and Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr., west side. After the town was divided, only 
two were chosen, one from the north and one from the south part of the village. 

Measurers of Land. — Were not chosen annually. After Samuel Smith and Peter Tilton, 
1660, none were recorded for many years. In 1696, Capt. Aaron Cooke, Nehemiah Dick- 
inson and Samuel Porter were chosen. 

A Packer was chosen to pack meat and fish intended for market. He was to inspect 
casks, and was called gauger of casks. The first one recorded in Hadley was Samuel Part- 
rigg, in March, 1679. Daniel Marsh was packer, 1694-1698. Sergt. Joseph Smith, the 
cooper, miller, sealer, &c. was chosen packer in 1669, and many years after, and his son 
Joseph succeeded him. — Samuel Partrigg understood the cooper's business, and the others 
were coopers. 

Fence Viewers. — Mr. Westwood and Brother Standley were chosen, April 24, 1661, "to 
view the meadow fences." Four regular fence viewers were appointed in April, 1662, two 
or the east side, and two for the west side. After some years, two were annually chosen for 
i'ort Meadow and Hockanum, two for Great Meadow, two for Forty Acres and School 
Meadows, and one or two for Little Panset, on the west side. They were appointed by 
the selectmen till 1693, and afterwards chosen by the town. 

Hayward. — Goodman Montague was chosen a common Hayward, May 11, 1661, and 
again in 1662. He was to have 12 pence each for cattle and hogs, two shillings for a horse, 
and 20 pence for 20 sheep, that he should find loose in the meadow, and bring out; to be 
paid by the owners. At a later period, these officers were called Field Drivers, and two 
were chosen annually. In a colony law, 1693, ^^^Y ^''^ called "Haywards or Field-drivers." 

Hogreeves were ordered by a law of 1720. No earlier law is found. Hadley first chose 
hogreeves in 1721. 

Hog-ringers. — In March, 1706, the town voted to choose hog-ringers annually, and they 
were to ring all swine 14 inches high, found unringed on commons or fields, from March i 
to Dec. I. To have 4 pence for each. The west side voted that hogs should be ringed in 
1663 and 1664. Hogs seem to have run at large if ringed, or sometimes if yoked and 

Cow-keeper. — There was a cow-keeper in Hadley, on the east side, in 1662, and long 
after, who had the care of the cows in their great pasture, the woods, and was paid by the 
owners of the cows. He is seldom noticed in the records. There was a cow-keeper on the 
west side, 1663. Sometimes there was a keeper of the dry herd. 

A Shepherd was to be hired, April, 1686 and 1687. Pens were to be made to fold the 
sheep at night, 1687, and "their lodgings" would help pay the charges. Selectmen to 
order. A shepherd had sometimes been employed years before. 

Grave Digger. — It was voted, March 9, 1663, that Richard Montague should have four 
shillings for every grave he makes for a grown person, and two shillings for the grave of a 
child under ten years. 

The persons who rung the bell and swept and took care of the meeting-house, are not 
noticed in the record. 

A Pound was ordered to be built by the "four quarters on this side," each quarter its 
share, Feb. 9, 1663. It was not built till Sept., 1664, after complaint to the Court. The 
place was not mentioned, but a few years after, the pound was in the middle highway into 
the meadow, which was 6 rods wide, and Thomas Webster, who had a little house in this 
highway, was called "pound-keeper and shepherd," 1684. A new pound was voted in 

There was a Guard on the Sabbath before there was any Indian war. The town voted, 
April 4, 1664, that the military officers "should choose the guard for the defence of the town 
upon Lord's days, Lectures and public meeting days of God's worship." In 1667, it was 
voted that every soldier, who attended on the guard a year, should receive a pound of powder 
and a pound of lead. The service was light. The soldier carried his arms to the place of 
meeting, and sat in the seat of the guard. 

By-laws and Orders of the town, voted May 3, 1693, and allowed by the County Court, 
Sept. 23, 1693, for directing and managing the prudential affairs of the town. Abridged. 

I. Ten men, including a majority of the selectmen, having assembled, may proceed with 
the business of a town meeting, the meeting having been legally warned. 


2. Common fences are to be made good by March 20th, yearly — to be 4^ feet high, or 
ditch and rails, or hedge equivalent thereto. To be so close as to keep out swine three 
months old. 

3. Owners of defective fences, after one day's warning and nothing done, are to pay the 
viewers double price for mending the same. 

4. Every man to have a stake iz inches high at the end of his fence, with the two first 
letters of his name, facing the way the fence runs. 

5. Hockanum and Fort Meadow are to be cleared yearly on Michaelmas day, (Sept. 29;) 
the Great Meadow a fortnight after; unless the selectmen order otherwise. 

6. Those who leave open gates and bars of common fields, between March 20, and the 
opening of the fields, are to pay 5 shillings besides all damages. 

7. No man to trespass by going over his neighbor's land with team or cart, or by baiting, 
without leave. Fine, 2s. 6d. and to pay damages. 

8. Horses, cattle, sheep and swine found in the common fields without a keeper, within 
the time aforesaid, are to be pounded, and hogs at all times. Horses and cattle to pay for 
each poundage, one shilling, and two pence for the keeper of the pound; hogs and sheep 6 
pence and a penny for the keeper, besides damages. 

9. All heads over 16 years, are to work one day on the highway; and owners of meadow 
land at the rate of one day for 20 acres. 

10. Any person refusing to work after 24 hours warning, forfeits 2s. 6d. 

1 1 . All heads over 14, when called out by the selectmen to cut brush or clear the commons, 
shall work one day yearly in June, or forfeit 2s. 6d. 

12. All young cattle should be herded annually at some place remote from the town; the 
owners to pay the expense. The selectmen to expend what is necessary. 

Occupation of the inhabitants of Hadley. — The early settlers 
were generally thrifty, substantial men. They all had lands 
and derived the greater part of their support from their lands and 
labors. Most of them were farmers, as they had been in the 
towns from which they came. There were some artificers, and 
a few that had been in trade. Several left buildings and lands 
in Connecticut. The estates of a number of them were worth 
from 800 to 1 100 pounds, after their decease. 

Trade must have been quite limited at Hadley in the 17th 
century, yet some persons connected traffic with their other 
employments, at times, as William Partrigg, Lieut. Samuel 
Smith, Philip Smith, Samuel Porter, and William Lewis. The 
fur-trade with the Indians was in the hands of John Pynchon, 
and he had agents in the towns. In Hadley, on the west side, 
Zechariah Field traded with Indians and whites, and failed 
about 1664. On the east side, Doct. John Westcarr had the 
Indian trade for a year or two before the Indian war of 1675. 
Previous to 1670, the people of Hadley bought many goods of 
John Pynchon at Springfield, and paid him in wheat, flour, pork 
and malt. — The second Samuel Porter, who died in 1722, was 
the most extensive trader there had been in the county of Hamp- 
shire, except John Pynchon. He left a large estate. 

The artificers or mechanics were commonly farmers also. 
Timothy Nash was a blacksmith. John Russell, senior, was a 
glazier, a trade that required some skill in the days of diamond 


glass. Richard Montague was a baker, but there was not much 
demand for his services in Hadley, except in the Indian war. 
William Partrigg was a cooper, as well as trader. The first 
Samuel Porter had a set of joiner and carpenter's tools, valued 
at £b, 2s. 6d., and he undoubtedly sometimes used them, and 
his son Hezekiah was a carpenter. Robert Boltwood may have 
been a carpenter; he could build a mill. The records do not make 
known the names of the men who built chimneys, made garments, 
or made shoes. 

Petitions or Addresses of Hadley relating to public 


I. Petition when the General Court was contending with the 
Commissioners of Charles II., 1665. 

King Charles II. asserted his right to interfere in the domestic 
concerns of Massachusetts, and sent commissioners, in 1664, to 
regulate the affairs of New England. The inhabitants of Mass- 
achusetts, relying on their charter, resolved to resist the orders 
of the king, and to nullify his conmiission, and they succeeded. 
The requisitions of the king gave birth to the parties of prerog- 
ative and of freedom, which continued to divide Massachusetts 
till the establishment of independence. The dawning strife of the 
new system against the old one had begun.* In the midst of the 
contest between the General Court and the royal Commissioners, 
Hadley sent a long petition or address to the General Court, 
dated April 25, 1665. It was drawn up by Mr. Russell, who 
was a zealous opposer of the pretensions and encroachments of 
England. Northampton also sent a petition, dated April 19, 
1665, signed by 86 persons, requesting the Court "to stand for, 
confirm, and maintain our former and ancient liberties and priv- 
ileges, both in church and commonwealth." It was only about 
one-fourth as long as that of Hadley. Mr. Russell was inclined 
to be wordy, and was not always explicit. f 

To the much honored General Court of the Massachusetts now assembled at Boston, the 
humble petition of the inhabitants of the town of Hadley: 

Honored and worthy fathers, if we call you fathers and Gods too, we speak but after the 
most high one of these relative titles, bespeak the tender and natural love we confide in you 
for; the other tells us what power you have in your hands to help us and the end for which 
God hath clothed you therewith; both show us our duty of repairing to you for help (in time 
of danger) under him who is over all. If ever there were appearances of danger towards us, 
we think now more. The cry of our sins as well as the Lord's threatenings being so manifest 
to them that have ears to hear. Had the Lord but spoken by the meanest of his messengers, 
tender hearts would have trembled; but when the Lord hath seconded so many voices of his 

♦Bancroft's History of United States, Vol. II. 

fif my minutes are correct, Mr. Russell preached the election sermon at Boston, May, 1665. 


precious servants by the midnight cries of those portentous signs* in the heavens, once and 
again; and that in conjunction with the disastrous state-shakings among us, we would not 
Pharaoh like harden our hearts, or refuse to see the lifting up of the Lord's hand. Either 
of these might administer sad thoughts of heart; both together give us more cause to look 
out that with the prudent we may foresee the danger and hide ourselves, rather than with 
the simple, pass on and be punished. 

The Good Lord our God (forever blessed be his name) hath in a day of danger in the 
world, bid us enter into our chambers and hath kept us safe with himself. His eyes have 
been upon us, his salvation for walls and bulwarks; when we nor had, nor could have any 
other, he hath graciously made his word to be verified to us, that he would go before us and 
be our rere-ward, himself creating on all our dwelling places, his cloud and smoke and flam- 
ing fire; and upon all the glory causing a defence to be; affording here a tabernacle for a 
shadow from the heat, and a place of refuge and covert from the storm. Have we seen the 
Lord assaying so to do to any other since he brought his own redeemed his son and first 
born out of Egypt ? May we not look from one end of the earth, yea and heavens too, to 
the other and not see it ? And in what way the Lord hath done this for us, and what statutes 
and judgments he hath caused us to keep; which hath been our wisdom and made us great 
in the sight of the nations, hath been a thing too public and glorious to be concealed or doubt 
ed of. By what shepherds the Lord hath led and fed us here, and what hath been the in- 
tegrity of their hearts and skillfulness of their hands; would be wretched ingratitude if we 
should so soon forget, especially having so often and lately sung the Lord's praises for the 
same. That we have not so carried toward these as we ought we know, and desired to be 
humbled for. We know also that there is a dreadful difference between serving the Lord 
under these, and other services. That we may not know this, as fools come to understand 
good and evil, is our humble petition and request to yourselves; who under God are the only 
means to save us therefrom, and whom we have trusted with all we have for this very end. 
We humbly but most earnestly beseech you that the same may be kept for us and for the 
Lord. Nor do we herein ask any more than the Lord allows and commands us to do. We 
would fear God, and honor the king. Whatever royal grants of grace we have received 
either from the Lord in Heaven or kings on earth, the accepting, holding fast and maintain- 
ing of the same with due thankfulness, is the true magnifying of that grace, and to throw 
away, or cowardly to suffer ourselves to be flattered or frightened from it, is the despising 
and dishonoring thereof. The faster we hold the grace of God, even when he seems to be 
angry and thrust us away; the more we honor and please him. The king of heaven will 
give his poorest subject on earth, leave to challenge resolutely his right and not to let it go 
for frowns or threats. And why should we think that a just and gracious king on earth will 
not do in like manner. We have right from God and man to chuse our own governors, make 
and live under our own laws. Our liberty and privileges herein as men we prize and would 
hold as our lives; this makes us freemen and not slaves. Our privilege herein as Christians 
in regard of the kingdom, name, glory of our God is far more precious than our lives. Here- 
by we enjoy and are not without God in the world. And we must give an account of our 
holding and improving thereof, to the hazard of much more than the worth of our lives. 
We would not live so accursed as to live having betrayed our trust herein. We should then 
be ashamed to live and afraid to die, when now through the maintaining of the same, thro' 
the Lord's grace, we are neither. Nor is it our own portion only that we trade with in this 
case, but our children's stock also — even their advantages as men and Christians to serve 
the Lord and be accounted to him for a generation forevermore. Can we bear to think 
that they should rise up and call us cursed for betraying them in their successive generations, 
and to publish the same to the ends of the earth. 

Honored and endeared in the Lord, you are our nail, we hope, in a sure place. On you 
we hang our enjoyments, houses, lands, liberties, wives, children, lives and all our sanctu- 
ary vessels. At your hands we look for them again, and the Lord will require them. True, 
what danger is, you are in the forefront of it, but is it not the Lord that set you there ? And 
he that gave Joshua so many charges to be strong and very courageous knows what all his 
Joshuas need, and will withhold no good thing from them that walk uprightly. Your place 
is not worse than David's valley of the shadow of death; he that was with him will be with 
you and then no fear of ill. Nor is your help less than Jonathan's when the Lord wrought 

*One of these signs was the comet of 1664 and 1665. 


such deliverance for and by him. We with our prayers and endeavors, heads and hearts, 
and lands and estates and lives will be with you and subject unto you. He can deliver if 
he will; if not, we are not careful in this matter. We again beseech you, Let us give fear, 
honor, tribute, obedience to the Lord and the king, with all humility, constancy, and willing- 
ness as his due. And what is given us for ourselves and for our God, let us never bereave 
ourselves nor rob him of. We crave pardon for the length and plainness of our speech 
(which yet, we hope hath not been rude.) Our hearts have been and are full of affection. 
We desire to leave this testimony of it with yourselves and to pour out the remainder before 
the Lord in our earnest and hearty prayer for his presence with and blessing upon you and 
your resolves; to your own comfort, the continuance and increase of the prosperity of our 
Zion, and the advancement of the honor of his most glorious name. And so hoping in the 
Lord, we rest your humble suppliants. 
Hadley, April 25th, 1665. 

This petition was signed by gi persons, who must have included 
almost every male in the town, above 21 years of age. About 63 
belonged to the east side of the river, and 28 to the west side. 

II. Petition of Hadley against the impost or customs, 1669. 

On the 7th of November, 1668, the General Court of Massa- 
chusetts ordered that duties should be imposed on goods and 
merchandise, and on horses, cattle and grain imported into this 
colony, after the first of March next. Petitions against this act 
were sent from some towns on the sea-board, and from Spring- 
field, Northampton and Hadley on Connecticut River. These 
three towns apprehended that Connecticut would retaliate, and 
impose a tax on their produce sent down the river. The duty 
was reduced in i66g, and suspended as to Connecticut and Ply- 
mouth in 1670. The Hadley petition is subjoined. It appears 
to be in the hand-writing of William Goodwin. 

Northampton stated that it cost is. 8d. a bushel to transport 
wheat to Boston, viz., is. to Windsor, 2d. thence to Hartford, and 
6d. from Hartford to Boston. This was the cost of transport 
when grain was carted to Windsor. 

To the Right Worshipful Richard Bellingham, Esq., Governor, and to the rest of the 
Worshipful Assistants and Deputies of the General Court of the Massachusetts Colony. 

The humble petition of the inhabitants of the town of Hadleigh sheweth: 

That whereas we have been informed of an order made the last General Court about 
customs to be laid on all (unless some specials excepted) imports and exports, which order 
was left with some preparatives (in case) towards an execution this next ensuing March. 
The sense we have and fears that we are filled with of evil and danger towards the whole in 
general, and ourselves in special (with reference to the same) do enforce us to present these 
following considerations to this honored Court. 

I. Liberty, liberty of the subject and commons being the great thing we have made 
(and we trust in sincerity) profession of, the clogging and loading of trade, the freedom 
whereof is the advance of a people, will it not administer matter of discouragement, sink- 
ing discouragement to our own people and occasion of evil report among others, that we 
who have been an example of seeking liberty should become an example of taking it away 
from ourselves and others f 



2. The moving (that we say not commotion) of men's spirits generally at the thing, as 
indeed we find it which (we think) we may say of all sorts among us, demonstrates the tender 
sense that people have thereof, and the working of passions within. Now the general 
motions of spirits hath still been accounted a thing regardable in societies of all sorts, and 
this we find to be as of one man with us against this thing. 

3. Its to us matter of no small fear lest the thing itself circumstanced with the dissentions 
and strivings about it, should administer occasion of drawing of an heavier yoke upon us 
from others and afford a plea for the expediency and necessity of the same to us, who could 
not live without customs nor agree in having them. 

4. We cannot but suspect the product thereof will be the diversion of trade especially as 
to our neighbor colony in Connecticut, and then if the trade be gone the customs will be of 
little avail to the supply of our wants or others. 

5. We ourselves in this part of the colony are like to have not only the common share in 
the evils and dangers likely hereupon to ensue, but also a burden even a sinking load of 
overplus more than we can bear, for our transport being unavoidably through Connecticut 
Colony we must look to have so much taken from us as will make our trading (without 
which we cannot subsist) intolerable. How much we may or shall suffer we Imow not, 
but words are high and that which sounds in our ears is, that its no reason they should be 
losers by our colony; hence they say its but equal that they should take so much again as 
is by our order taken from them. And so we shall bear the burden of the whole colony 
though we sink under it. 

6. Seeing we are required (and according to righteousness joyfully do it) to bear our share 
of the burthens and duty belonging to the whole, we trust we shall share in the privileges 
proportionably and find such protection and safeguard under the government as that the 
laws and order thereof may not expose us (more than others of the colony) to detriment and 

In respect of all these as well as of other considerations our humble request to the Hon- 
ored Council is that if possible there may be no procedure to execution of this law (which 
passed so barely also in the General Court) until the next General Court; that so we 
may have liberty and opportunity to present our petitions unto and seek help from them, 
that either the thing may not proceed or some effectual course may be taken that we be 
not thereby oppressed beyond measure only because we are members of this colony. 

Thus craving pardon for our so far troubling of you and beseeching your help in this our 
distress, we rest your suppliants ever wishing and praying for your welfare and prosperity 
in the Lord. 

Hadley, Feb. 19, 1668-9. 

East Side. — 34. 
Henry Clarke, 
Andrew Bacon, 
William Goodwin, 
Samuel Smith, 
Joseph Kellogg, 
William Marcum, 
Thomas Dickinson, 
John Russell, Jr., 
John White, Sr., 
Philip Smith, 
Nathaniel Dickinson, Sr., 
John Russell, Sr., 
Will. Westwood, 
Aaron Cooke, 
Peter Tilton, 
William Lewis, 
Andrew Warner, 
Samuel Gardner, Sr., 
Samuel Church, 
Chileab Smith, 
Timothy Nash, 

John Crow, 
John Taylor, 
Samuel Porter, 
Richard Goodman, 
Thomas Coleman, 
Richard Mountague, 
Edward Church, 
John Dickinson, Sr., 
Francis Barnard, 
Robert Bolt wood, 
Joseph Baldwin, 
Thomas Wells, 
John Hubbard. 

East Side.— 30. 
Caleb Watson, 
Nehemiah Dickinson, 
Hezekiah Dickinson, 
Azariah Dickinson, 
Samuel Foote, 
John Smith, 
Samuel Gardner, Jr., 
Thomas Partrigg, 

Daniel Marsh, 
Isaac Harrison, 
Noah Coleman, 
Joseph Warriner, 
Samuel Marsh, 
Richard Lyman, 
Samuel Crow, 
Philip Lewis, 
William Webster, 
William Rooker, 
Isaac Stanley, 
John Abot, 
Isaac Warner, 
Samuel Partrigg, 
Peter Mountague, 
John Westcarr, 
John Dickinson, Jr., 
John Warner, 
John Peck, 
Jonathan Baldwin, 
Samuel Bolt wood, 
John Barnard. 



West Side. — 28. 
Thomas Meekins, Sr., 
Thomas Meekins, Jr., 
Isaac Graves, Sr., 
John Graves, Sr., 
William Allis, 
John Allis, 
William Gull, 
Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr 
Daniel White, 
Philip Russell, 
Richard Billing, 

Samuel Hinsdell, 
Samuel Billing, 
John Hawks, 
John Coules, Sr., 
Daniel Warner, 
John Coules, Jr., 
Isaac Graves, Jr., 
John Graves, Jr., 
Samuel Dickinson, 
Obadiah Dickinson, 
Samuel Kellogg, 
Samuel Allis, 

Samuel Gillet, 
Samuel Field, 
James Brown, 
Barnabas Hinsdell, 
Joseph Allis. 

East side, 34 old names. 

" " 30 later names. 
West " 28 names. 

Total, 92 " 
A few did not sign. 

III. Petition of Hadley and Northampton in reference to the 
provocation of the people and God's displeasure, 1670. 

"To the worshipful and much honored General Court of the Massachusetts now sitting 
in Boston: 

It being abundantly manifest to them that know the Lord and do consider the operations 
of his hands that his carriage towards his churches and people in this country hath not 
been as in former times the years of the right hand of the most high; but that instead of 
his wonted blessing and lifting up the light of his countenance, he hath shewed us both 
many signs of his displeasure against and departure from us; which if he proceed to do then 
is that fearful woe Hosea 9: 12 accomplished towards us. The consideration and fear 
whereof occasioneth us to present this our humble enquiry to this honored Court, viz. 
Whether the rod of God upon our churches and land has not this speaking voice to us, that 
there should be some public and solemn enquiry what it is that hath provoked the Lord 
(who doth not afflict willingly, but if need be) against us. The genuine and tender filial 
spirit when it sees the father angry, cannot rest without inquiry why it is; the example of 
that made after God's own heart 2 Samuel 21 : 1,2 (as well as others) is a pattern to us. 
Our own distresses and dangers may necessitate us to faithful and diligent search if there 
be any Achan or Jonas that may hazard the loss and ruin of all. The finding and unan- 
imous agreeing in what our evil is seems to be the necessary and just means and part of 
our turning to the Lord, whereby only we can hope for his return (in mercy) unto us, 
according to his wonted loving kindness, which, that we may surely and speedily [word 
illegible] is the earnest prayer of your humble servants. 

Hadley, May 3, 1670. HENRY CLARKE, 

In behalf of the freemen of Hadley. 
WILLIAM CLARKE, / °^ Northampton, 

in the name of sundry of the freemen there, who have had the consideration 
of the above writing. 

This petition or address was written by Mr. Russell, Jr. The 
signature of John Russell may be that of his father. North- 
ampton had no settled pastor at that time.* 

In May, 1670, the writing from Hadley and Northampton was 
considered by the deputies, and a committee of five including 
Peter Tilton, made a report, which was accepted, wherein were 
noticed the causes of God's displeasure, the effects of it, and the 
means of removing it. Among the prevailing evils were men- 

*Rev. Eleazar Mather, the first minister, died July 24, 1669. Mr. Russell assisted at 
his ordination, June 18, 1661. The Northampton church was organized the same day, 
and not June 4, as stated page 47, 


tioned, innovations threatening the ruin of the Congregational 
way. Some days after, in another paper, the deputies censured 
the magistrates and ministers who consented to the organization 
of the third church in Boston, (now the Old South,) composed of 
seceders from the first church, who had not been dismissed. 
They contended for "the liberty of every church to exercise all 
the ordinances of God among themselves." An altercation en- 
sued between the magistrates and deputies. The papers of the 
latter are in the hand-writing of Peter Tilton. The persons 
censured by these deputies were justified by those of the next year. 


Separation of Hatfield from Hadley — Proceedings of Hatfield. 

The settlers of Hartford, on each side of Little River, managed 
many of their concerns separately, in what were called side-meet- 
ings. The planters of Hadley, settled on both sides of the Con- 
necticut, and followed the example of Hartford, each side per- 
forming many things apart. The settlers on the west side held 
side-meetings and kept side-records which still remain. In 
March, 1665, the town voted that the west side should make and 
maintain all their ways and bridges, and the east side all their 
ways and bridges, except the mill-bridge on the west side, which 
was to be maintained by both sides. In June, 1665, the east and 
west sides voted to carry on the work of town and church as one 
"until the Lord make it appear that one part of us have a call 
to make a society of themselves." 

The west side people began to think of becoming a separate 
parish in 1665, but they did not send a petition to the General 
Court, to be a parish or society, till May, 1667. They were 
appaiently too few in number to support a minister, and build a 
meeting-house, but they were united, active and persevering, and 
such men commonly perform what they undertake. Their peti- 
tion, which follows, may contain a little exaggeration, but those 
who live near the Connecticut can readily believe the account of 
their trouble in crossing the river, and of the screeching of the 
women and children. The Latin quotation was not called for. 
The word "ordinances," as used in the petition, refers especially 
to the usual services of the Sabbath. 


To the Honored Governor, Dep. Governor, Assistants and Deputies, now in General 
Court assembled: 

The petition of us whose names are underwritten, being inhabitants of the west side of 
the river at Hadley, sheweth — (May 3, 1667,) — that, whereas it hath pleased God to make 
you the fathers of this Commonwealth, and it hath pleased the Lord, by your great care 
and diligence under him, to continue our peace and plenty of outward things, and in a 
more especial manner the chieftest and principal of all, the Gospel of peace, with the liberty 
of his Sabbaths, which mercies your humble petitioners desire to be thankful unto God and 
you for, that you are so ready and willing for to help those that stand in need of help, which 
hath encouraged us your humble petitioners for to make this our address, petition and 
request, to you for relief in this our present distressed state and condition. 

First, your petitioners, together with their families within the bounds of Hadley town, 
upon the west side of the river, commonly called by the name of Connecticut river, where 
we for the most part have lived about 6 years, have attended on God's ordinances on the 
other side of the river, at the appointed seasons that we could or durst pass over the river, 
the passing being very difficult and dangerous, both in summer and winter, which thing 
hath proved and is an oppressive burden for us to bear, which, if by any lawful means it 
may be avoided, we should be glad and thankful to this honored court to ease us therein, 
conceiving it to be a palpable breach of the Sabbath, although it be a maxim in law: nemo 
debet esse judex in propria causa, yet, by the Word of God to us, it is evidently plain to be a 
breach of the Sabbath: Ex. xxxv: 2; Levit. xxiii: 3, yet many times we are forced to it; 
for we must come at the instant of time, be the season how it will. Sometimes we come 
in considerable numbers in rainy weather, and are forced to stay till we can empty our canoes 
that are half full of water, and before we can get to the meeting-house, are wet to the skin. 
At other times, in winter seasons, we are forced to cut and work them out of the ice, till 
our shirts be wet upon our backs. At other times, the winds are high and waters rough, 
the current strong and the waves ready to swallow us — our vessels tossed up and down so 
that our women and children do screech, and are so affrighted that they are made unfit for 
ordinances, and cannot hear so as to profit by them, by reason of their anguish of spirit; 
and when they return, some of them are more fit for their beds than for family duties and 
God's services, which they ought to attend. 

In brevity and verity, our difficulties and dangers that we undergo are to us extreme and 
intolerable; oftentimes some of us have fallen into the river through the ice, and had they 
not had better help than themselves, they had been drowned. Sometimes we have been 
obliged to carry others when they have broken in, to the knees as they have carried them 
out, and that none hitherto hath been lost, their lives are to be attributed to the care and 
mercy of God. 

There is about four score and ten persons on our side of the river, that are capable of 
receiving good by ordinances, but it is seldom that above half of them can go to attend, 
what through the difficulty of passage and staying at home by turns and warding, some 
being weak and small which, notwithstanding, if the means were on our side the river, they 
might have the benefit of the ordinances which now they are deprived of to the grief of us all. 
Further, when we do go over the river, we leave our relatives and estates lying on the outside 
of the colony, joining to the wilderness, to be a prey to the heathen, when they see their 
opportunity. Yet, notwithstanding, our greatest anxiety and pressure of spirit is that the 
Sabbath, which should be kept by us holy to the Lord, is spent with such unavoidable dis- 
tractions, both of the mind and of the body. And for the removing of this, we unanimously 
have made our address to our brethren and friends on the other side of the river, by a 
petition that they would be pleased to grant us liberty to be a society of ourselves, and that 
we might call a minister to dispense the word of God to us, but this, by them, would not be 
granted, although, in the month of June, in the year 1665, it was agreed and voted, at a 
town meeting, that when the west side had a call of God thereto, they might be a society of 
themselves. We sent a second time to them, entreating that according to said agreement 
they would grant our request to put it to a hearing, but they will not, so that we, your humble 
petitioners, have no other way or means, that we know of, but to make our humble address 
to this honored court for relief, in this our distressed state, humbly praying this honored 
court to vouchsafe your poor petitioners that favor as to be a society of ourselves, and have 
liberty to settle a minister to dispense the ordinances of the Lord unto us, which we hope 
will be for the furtherance of the work of the Lord amongst us, and for our peace and safety. 


Not that we desire to make any breach among brethren, for to attain our desires, nor yet 
to hinder the great work of the Lord amongst us, but that which we aim at is the contrary. 
Thus, committing our cause to God and this honored court, and all other your weighty 
affairs, we leave to the protection and guidance of the Almighty, which is the prayer of 
your humble petitioners. — May 3, 1667. 

Thomas Meekins, St., Daniel White, John Allis, 

Wm. Allis, John Welles, Obadiah Dickinson, 

John Coule, St., Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr., Samuel Gillet, 

Isaac Graves, Eleazer Frary, John Field, 

Richard Billing, Samuel Billing, John Coule, Jr., 

Wm. Gull, Samuel Dickinson, Ursula Fellows, 

Samuel Belden, Thomas Meekins, Jr., Mary Field. 

John Graves, Samuel Kelog, 

Daniel Warner, Barnabas Hinsdell, 

John Coleman, Philip Russell, Samuel Allis and Benjamin Wait did not sign the petition; 
perhaps they did not all reside on the west side in May, 1667. 

An abstract of "the Answer of the inhabitants of Hadley on 
the east side to the complaints made by them of the same town 
on the west side." 

We have done our brethren and neighbors no wrong. We hold to the covenant made 
between us, which was done upon their desire. This covenant related to the upholding of 
the worship of God among us. We think that granting what they request will be the break- 
ing and marring of them and ourselves, as we are together too weak. Should we grant 
their desire we should sin against the Lord, ourselves and them. We desire that nothing 
may be done by this Court to the making void of the agreements between us. — May 7, 1667. 

This answer was signed by 44 of the inhabitants of the east side. 

The General Court heard the allegations of both parties, pre- 
sented by Thomas Meekins, William Allis and Isaac Graves, in 
behalf of the petitioners, and by Mr. John Russell, pastor, Mr. 
Samuel Smith and Mr. Peter Tilton in behalf of the town. They 
judged it not best to make a division at present; thought the best 
expedient would be for them jointly to settle another minister, 
who would accommodate those on the west side, when the pass- 
age of the river was difficult. 

The petition of the west side was again presented in September, 
1667, and a committee reported, but the two houses disagreed, 
and the report was not accepted. 

The two sides had some correspondence in 1667, and in the 
early part of 1668, but could not agree. The east side were will- 
ing to have a second minister, but expected the west side people 
would attend worship on the east side, except when the passage 
was difficult. The west side desired to be a society by them- 
selves, and to have a minister constantly with them. 

In April, 1668, the east side inhabitants sent to the General 
Court another answer to the complaints of those on the west side. 
It was written by Mr. Russell, and is very long. Some part of it 


When we moved to this plantation, we engaged to each other to have two ministers. We 
gave to poor men liberty to suit themselves, and those who had more estate denied them- 
selves, not taking up half as much as they might have done, no man having more than 45* 
acres of interval land. This was done in respect to maintaining the ministry and ordi- 
nances. When those on the west side of the river took up land there, they did it on condi- 
tion that they were to be one with us and to come to the east side on the Sabbath, except in 
extraordinary times, one of the ministers would go over to them. The meeting-house was 
to be set where it is, for their sakes, to our great inconvenience. The difficulties of crossing 
the river were presented to them at first, and they chose to go. In some other towns, the 
river is crossed on the Sabbath. It is doubtful whether they can make a plantation of them- 
selves. The place does not afford boggy meadows-j- or such like, that men can live upon, 
but their subsistence must be from their homelots and intervals. A great part of these 
men are in near relation to us and we would not injure them. If the Court judge that our 
brethren have a call of God to be by themselves, we trust we shall do our duty without dis- 
turbance. Our place is hard, remote and inconvenient. In asking that the river may be 
the bounds between them and us, and all the land on that side pay public charges to them, 
they demand what is unjust. We are about 46 or 47J families, and if the river be the 
bounds, we shall not have so much land to maintain public ordinances as they, who are a 
little more than half as many. Signed by Henry Clarke, John Russell, Jr., William Good- 
win, Andrew Bacon and William Lewis, in the name of the rest of the inhabitants of Hadley, 
on the east side of the river. 

April 22, 1668. 

William Allis and Isaac Graves, who were in Boston, made a 
long reply, May, 1668, in behalf of the inhabitants on the west 
side, to the declaration of their brethren and neighbors on the 
east side. 

They owned the covenant of 1660, but did not suppose such a covenant perpetual, when 
things should so change as to require an alteration. Thought they had a clear call of God 
to be a society. Mentioned the hazard of passing the river. In nine Sabbaths from Dec. 
15 to Feb. 16, 1667-8, they were hindered from going over by the danger of the river. There 
was danger from the Indians. One of their houses was burnt on the Sabbath some 
time ago, and they saw the beginning, but could render no relief. They had only their 
proportion of the lands jointly purchased. All was equalized by a committee. "When 
the meeting-house was put where it is, we declared that it should be no engagement to us, 
and desired them to set it where they pleased." — The subject was postponed to the next 

November 7, 1668. "In answer to the petitioners on the west side of the river at Hadley, 
the Court judgeth it meet that they be allowed to procure an able minister to settle with them 
on their side of the river, for whose maintenance they are carefully and comfortably to pro- 
vide, and shall be freed from the maintenance of the minister on the east side, unless the 
inhabitants on the east side of the river and they shall agree together for the maintenance 
and allowance of both jointly; provided that the inhabitants of the west side shall not rate 
any of the estates or lands of the inhabitants of the east side lying on the west side of the 
river, towards the maintenance of their ministry." 

In May, i66g, John Russell, pastor, and William Goodwin, 
ruling elder, in the name of the church, pointed out some diffi- 

*This is nearly correct. Though some had 50^ acres of land, this included 4 or 5 acres 
of the Meadow Plain, that was not interval land, and was not so considered. 

■j-They here allude to the water grass or sedge, of which much was formerly mowed. 

^According to this statement, the number of families had not increased in 5 or 6 years. 
The population had increased. 


culties in the preceding order, and desired explanations from the 
General Court. The Court replied and made explanations, and 
judged it reasonable that the inhabitants of the west side should 
have the unappropriated lands on that side. 

Thomas Meekins and Isaac Graves informed the Court, May, 
1669, that the west side had done much towards setting up a 
meeting-house, and as to a minister, "we have already pitched 
upon a man, who is recommended to us by sundry reverend and 
godly persons, and hope we shall obtain his help. The man whom 
we have in our eye is one Mr. Atherton, a son of the late Worship- 
ful Humphrey Atherton, of Dorchester." 

In October, 1669, the east side remaining unsatisfied, the Court 
appointed a committee from Northampton and Springfield, but 
they do not appear to have met; and on the 22d of December, 
1669, the following agreement ended the contest for many 

"Articles of agreement between the inhabitants on the east side of the river in Hadley 
with those of the same town on the west side of the river. 

1. It is covenanted and agreed that those on the east side of the river do grant and give 
to those on the west side, liberty to be a distinct town or township of themselves, and so 
of and among themselves to carry on all of their common or town occasions; and this to 
take place as soon as the Gen. Court shall grant their approbation or allowance thereof. 

2. For the bounds of each society or town, those on the east side are to have and enjoy 
now and forever the free and full disposal of all the land on the east side of the river, for 
the maintaining of all common charges respecting things ecclesiastical or civil. 

And on the west side, the bounds between the two societies or towns are to be the high- 
way between their several furlongs of land, viz. the highway running from the river to the 
Widow Fellows her house; and from thence downwards, the fence to be the bounds until 
it comes to the Mill river, and then the river to be the bounds until it meets with Mr. Webster's 
lot in Little Ponsett; and from thence the fence of Little Ponsett to be the bounds unto Con- 
necticut River, where the end of the said fence is; this to be and remain forever the bounds 
of each society or town, for the maintaining of the rights and privileges of each; viz. all the 
land on the lower or southwest side of the highway shall be unto the society or town of Had- 
ley on the east side of Connecticut, and all every parcel thereof to pay all common charges 
to the said town of Hadley on the east side of the river. Except those lands within the said 
highway and fence which are already either given or sold to inhabitants on the west jide; 
which land or parcells of land are the whole accommodations of Mr. Terry on the west side 
the river; and the whole accommodations of Nathaniel Dickinson, sen. and half of Mr. 
Webster's accommodations there, and John Hawks his whole accommodations, and all Joseph 
Kellogg's, and all Adam Nicholls his, and that which was Sam.uel Gardner's in Little Pon- 
set, and Goodman Crow's in Little Ponsett, and Nathaniel Stanley's in Little Ponsett, and 
Richard Montague's in Great Ponsett; and Jos. Baldwin's whole accommodations, and John 
White's in Great Ponsett, and John Dickinson's in Little Ponsett; and except 12 acres and 
a half above and besides all this when it shall be given or sold to an inhabitant or inhabit- 
ants on the west side of the river; all the other land within the lower part or S. West side of 
the highway and the forenamed fence to be to the town on the east side of the river forever. 

And the Society on the west side of the river are to have for their bounds all the lands on 
the west side of the river of Connecticut, except what lies within the highway from the river 
to the widow Fellows her house, and within the fence abovenamed. All the rest of the land 
not within the said highway and fence to be to the town and society on the west side of the 


river and at their free and full dispose forever, for the maintaining of all common charges 
respecting things civil and ecclesiastical. And they also are to have all the land within the 
highway and fence on the south west or lower side of the river, that is already given or sold 
to any inhabitant on the west side, which land in all the particulars and parcels of it is 
above specified, with 124 acres more, which shall be next given or sold to any inhabitants, 
&c.; to be to the society and town on the west side for the maintaining of all common charges 
forever. Only provided they shall not dispose of any land without the consent of the town, 
to any that are not approved and settled inhabitants of the town, until the General Court 
have granted them to be a town of themselves, and then forthwith and forever to have the 
full dispose of all the land on the west side the river except that above excepted, for the main- 
tenance of all common charges. 

3. It is mutually agreed and covenanted that the society or town of Hadley on the east 
side of the river, have liberty to get fencing stuff on the west side of the river, for their land 
lying on that sidethe river, both now and from time to time always, as also to get timber 
if any see cause to build a barn or shelter for securing his fruits raised there. The present 
fence in being, and the rest of the common fence [an omission here.] 

4. The inhabitants of the west side shall allow to those on the east side the sum of (i£, 
as the remainder of what is due for purchase money to the said inhabitants on the east side. 

5. In case there shall hereafter be a ferry between these two places, this agreement shall 
be no detriment with respect thereto to those on either side more than if they continued one 

Hereunto as a full and final issue of all controversy respecting our bounds of each society, 
and the manner or way of maintaining their public charges, (notwithstanding all manner of 
sales or gifts that shall or may be,) we who were chosen by each Company, viz. those on 
the east and those on the west side the river respectively, and impowered to issue the said 
difference, have set to our hands, this present zzd of December, 1669. 

Henry Clarke, Tho. Meekins, sen. 

[ohn Russel, Jr. William Allice, 

Samuel Smith, John Coule, sen. 

Nathaniel Dickinson, sr. Isaak Graves, 

Peter Tillton, Samuel Belden. 

This agreement was copied from the original paper in the hand- 
writing of Mr. Russell, which was sent down to Boston by Hadley, 
in the second controversy with Hatfield, about 1710, and remains 
among the public archives in the state-house. 

The town of Hatfield was incorporated on the 31st of May, 
1670, and a copy of the acts from the printed records, is annexed. 

"In answer to the petition of the inhabitants of Hadley on the west side of the riuer, that 
they may be allowed to be a toune of themselves, distinct from Hadley on the east side, the 
deputy of Hadlev certifying that that toune haue consented to release them if this Court 
doe approove thereof, &c. this Court doe therefore allow them on the west side of the riuer, 
to be a touneship distinct from them on the east side of the riuer, and doe grant them a 
tract of land westward, sixe miles back into the woods from the great river; their southerly 
bounds to be Northampton northerly bounds, and the land which Hadley reserves to them- 
selues, and from their sajd southerly Ijne to runne vp the riuer northerly upon the square 
sixe miles; their northerly bounds likewise to runne backe from th; great riuer sixe miles 
westward, as before, reserving proprietjes formerly granted to any person; and that this 
toune be called Hattfeilds." 

Hatfield was named from one of the three Hatfields in Eng- 
land, perhaps from Hatfield Broad Oak in Essex, so called from 
a broad-spread oak. 


Proceedings of the West Side and Hatfield. — On the 6th of 
November, 1668, the west side held a side-meeting, and voted to 
build a meeting-house 30 feet square, and chose a committee to 
procure timber, call out men, &c. On the 21st of November, 
they chose three men to procure a minister "to dispense the word 
of God to us," and in April, 1669, they sent men to Boston, who 
"pitched upon" Mr. Hope Atherton of Dorchester. The side 
manifested unanimously, May 17, 1669, that they were willing 
to call Mr. Atherton to the work of the ministry, and to give him 
50;^ a year. Before Nov. 25, 1670, Mr. Atherton had accepted 
a call from the town of Hatfield to settle among them, and they 
had voted to give him a houselot and meadow land, to build him 
a house 40 feet long and 20 wide, double story, and to allow 
him 60 pounds a year, two-thirds in wheat and one-third in pork. 
There is no record of the forming of the church, or of the ordina- 
tion of Mr. Atherton. These acts took place after March 28, 
1671, perhaps in April. Before the close of 1671, this small 
town had settled a minister, giving him bo£ a year, and built a 
house for him which cost above 90;^, and a meeting-house. Only 
6 of the males were members of any church, including Mr. Ath- 
erton. The church-members and those not so, were like-minded 
and united in all their proceedings. 

Hatfield may have had 30 families in 1670. The persons taxed 
in 1678, after the Indian war, were 48, and in 1682, 57. The 
number of families in 1682 may have been 48 or 50. They had 
five selectmen and other town officers as in Hadley. The herd- 
men and shepherds were recorded. Men were employed in the 
spring to burn the woods. Hatfield usually had a school after 
1678, and probably before; and a school-house was built in 1681. 
Doct. Thomas Hastings was one of the teachers, but most of 
them were educated at Harvard College. They received from 
30 to 35;^ a year in grain at the usual prices, and boarded them- 
selves, previous to 1700. A few girls attended the school, or 
might attend if they paid the same as boys. The scholars paid 
about two-thirds of the salary, and the school did not become 
free till 1722. — The small meeting-house had galleries and a 
turret and bell, and the bell was to be rung at nine o'clock in 1686. 
The meeting-house was in the street, and the pulpit was at the 
west end, and there was an aisle from the east door to the pulpit. 
A second meeting-house was voted Nov. 13, 1699; it was to be 
45 feet square, "with gable windows upon each squareof theroof." 
— Mr. Hope Atherton, the first minister, died June 8, 1677. Mr. 
Nathaniel Chauncey, the second minister, died Nov. 2, 1685. 


He had of the town a house, barn, homelot, firewood, and a salary 
of 60 pounds, in produce at the usual prices. Mr. William Will- 
iams was the third minister, 1686. His salary was 'jo£, — not 
equal to 175 silver dollars. 

In 1692, Hatfield began a new contest with Hadley, demanding 
that the river should be the boundary between them, and gained 
her object in 1733. The attempt of Hatfield to carry her south 
line into territory long in possession of Northampton, failed in 
1720, after a dispute of 26 years. Col. Samuel Partrigg or Part- 
ridge was powerful in Hatfield, and for many years was the most 
prominent man in the county. 


County of Hampshire — Towns and Churches before lycxj — Courts in Hampshire — Town 
marks — Hadley Cases in Courts — Presentments for wearing silks — Expenses of Courts — 
Transportation — Sleds — Prices of grain — Contributions for Harvard College. 

Feb. 26, 1662, Springfield appointed a committee, "concerning 
settling the towns in this western part of the colony, into 
the form of a county," On the 7th of May, 1662, the General 
Court established the County of Hampshire, by the following 
act: — 

Forasmuch as the inhabitants of this jurisdiction are much encreased, so that now they 
are planted farre into the country vpon Conecticott Riuer, who by reason of their remotenes 
cannot conveniently be annexed to any of the countyes already setled, & that publicke 
affaires may with more facility be transacted according to lawes heere established, it is 
ordered by this Court & authority thereof, that henceforth Springfeild, Northampton, and 
Hadley shall be & hereby are constituted as a county, the bounds or Ijmitts on the south to 
be the south Ijne of the pattent, the extent of other bounds to be full thirty miles distant 
from any or either of the foresajd tounes, & what tounes or villages soeuer shall hereafter 
be erected within the foresajd precincts to be & belong to the sajd county; and further, 
that the sajd county shall be called Hampshire, & shall haue & enjoy the libertjes & priv- 
iledges of any other county; & that Springfeild shall be the shire toune there, & the Courts 
to be kept one time at Springfeild & another time at Northampton; the like order to be 
observed for their shire meetings, that is to say, one yeere at one toune, & the next yeare at 
the other, from time to tjme. And it is further ordered, that all the inhabitants of that 
shire shall pay their publicke rates to the countrey in fatt catle, or young catle, such as fitt 
to be putt off, that no vnnecessary damage be put on the country; & in case they make pay- 
ment in corne, then to be made at such prises as the same doe commonly passe amongst 
themselves, any other former or annuall orders referring to the prises of corne notwith- 

When Hampshire was incorporated, it had but three towns, 
Springfield, Northampton and Hadley. Westfield was allowed 


to be a township, May 19, 1669. Hatfield was incorporated May 
31, 1670; it was settled before Westfield. Deerfield* was allowed 
the "liberty of a township," May 7, 1673; it was destroyed in 
1675 and re-settled about 1682. Brookfield was incorporated 
Oct. 15, 1673; it was destroyed in 1675 and re-settled by a few, 
and a garrison was kept there. It had not town privileges again 
till 1 718. Suffield, often called Southfield, had an informal in- 
corporation, June 3, 1674; the people dispersed in 1675, and 
returned after the Indian war. Enfield was made a town. May 
16, 1683. These nine towns (including Brookfield) composed 
the county of Hampshire in 1700. Squakeag, (Northfield,) 
granted in 1672, had been twice settled and twice broken up. 
Swampfield, (Sunderland,) was granted in 1673, to sundry inhab- 
itants of Hadley, and preparations were made for settlement, but 
owing to Indian wars, and fear of Indians, it remained deso- 
late forty years. Longmeadow and West Springfield were old 
settlements, but belonged to Springfield. 

Nine churches were organized in the county before 1700, viz., 
1st, at Springfield; 2d, Hadley; 3d, Northampton, 1661; 4th, 
Hatfield, 1671; 5th, Westfield, 1679; 6th, Deerfield, 1688; Suf- 
field; Enfield; West Springfield, 1698. 

Courts in Hampshire. — County Courts were regularly held 
twice a year, viz., at Northampton in March, and at Springfield 
in September. They had probate jurisdiction. Capital causes 
were tried by the Court of Assistants at Boston, and not by County 
Courts. The Hampshire courts were held by the Springfield 
commissioners till March, 1663, excepting two courts where John 
Webster was the principal judge. In 1663, 1664 and in March, 
1665, the courts were held by the town commissioners of the 
three towns. From 1665 to 1687, one or two magistrates with 
two, three or four men, nominated by the freemen of the county, 
and approved by the General Court, and called .A^ssociates, were 
judges of the County Courts. John Pynchon was the first mag- 
istratef in Hampshire county, and was chosen in 1665, and Peter 
Tilton was the second, in 1680. They presided in the County 
Courts, and were members of the house of magistrates at Boston, 
and judges of the Court of Assistants. John Webster and some 
others had "magistratical power," but it did not extend beyond 
the county. From 1663 to 1687, the commissioners and associate 

*It was then Pacomtuck. It had no other incorporation. 

•j-His father, William Pynchon, was a magistrate at Springfield many years, before there 
was any Hampshire county. 


judges from Hadley were Henry Clarke, 1 1 years, Samuel 
Smith, 8 years, Andrew Bacon, Peter Tilton and Philip Smith, 
about 3 years each, and Samuel Partrigg, one year. Capt. 
Aaron Cooke was one of the justices of the courts from 1687 
until his death in 1716. 

The courts were differently formed under Andros in 1687: and 
under the new charter, 1692, a Superior Court was substituted 
for a Court of Assistants, and Courts of Sessions, of Common 
Pleas, and of Probate, for County Courts. — Provision was 
made for a yearly session of the Superior Court at Springfield, 
but owing to hazard from the Indians, and the necessity of a 
guard for the judges, it is supposed that no regular Superior 
Court was held in Hampshire county till some years after 1700, 
perhaps not till 1716. In 1698, some judges that came up to 
Springfield, to try a person for murder, had a guard up of 26 

Twelve jurors from the towns attended at every County Court. 
There was but one jury previous to 1687, the jury of trials serving 
as a grand jury, as provided in the act incorporating Hadley, May 
22, 1661. The Court remarked in 1676, that this was allowed as 
a favor, the county being small, to prevent the charge of two juries. 
Corporal Richard Coy, from whom Coy's Hill received its name, 
was a juror from Brookfield in 1674 and in March, 1675, but 
that place, which was laid waste in 1675, sent no other juror for 
more than 40 years. 

A county Treasurer was chosen yearly. Peter Tilton held the 
office about ten years. A county Marshal was appointed by the 
court in 1668. After 1692, there was a county Sheriff instead of 
a Marshal. The second Samuel Porter held the office several 
years, and in 1696, executed two Indians for murder. Elizur 
Holyoke was Recorder for the courts from 1660 to his death in 
1676. Samuel Partrigg succeeded for Northampton courts, and 
John Holyoke for Springfield courts. James Cornish was Clerk 
under Andros, 1687 to 1689. 

A prison or House of Correction, with a house for the prison 
keeper under the same roof, was begun at Springfield in 1661 
and finished in 1668. Most of the boards, plank and timber were 
sawed by hand. It was 40 feet long. Simon Lobdell was the 
first prison keeper in 1668. It was burnt by the Indians in 1675, 
and another was built, 1677 — 1680, which cost about to£. 

A prison was built in Northampton in 1707, 24 by 16 feet 
besides the chimney, and a small house at the end for the keeper. 
It stood near the site of the new town hall. 


Town marks in Hampshire. — Every town was required to 
have a distinct mark for cattle and horses, appointed by the 
General Court, and all these animals which fed in open common 
without constant keepers, were to have a brand-mark upon the 
horn, or left buttock or shoulder, that it might be known to what 
town they belonged. In 1681, brand-marks were ordered by the 
Court for the Hampshire towns, viz., S. P. for Springfield, N. H. 
for Northampton, H. D. for Hadley, H. F. for Hatfield, W. F. 
for Westfield, and S. and something else for Suffield. The two 
letters for each town were united, as H3 for Hadley. 

Hadley Cases in Court. 

The people of Hadley were in general staid, regular and peace- 
ful, and not inclined to quarrels and law-suits. Most of the 
people of Northampton and Hatfield were similar. There were 
more contentions and litigious persons in the southern towns in 
the county, especially in Suffield. Hadley people had but little 
business for the courts. Misdemeanors were rare, and those who 
committed them were usually servants, transient persons, or a 
few wild young men of the town. A large portion of the white 
servants in this country for a century were Europeans, brought 
over by captains of vessels and their services sold for a few years, 
to pay their passage. The poor people of Great Britain could 
come to the colonies in no other way. 

i66z. Richard Fellows sued Judith Varlete (a Dutch woman) of Hartford, for defa- 
mation, in saying Fellows had played the rogue. Jury found for plaintiff los. damages, 
and 13s. 6d. costs. 

1662. William Pixley vs. Joseph Root of Northampton, for slander. The jury found 
for Pixley, ;£io. 

1663. Benjamin Wait, for being the author of a libelous writing found about Goodwife 
Hawks's door, defaming her, was to pay her ^£ and pay costs. 

1664. Hadley was fined forty shillings, for not prosecuting their appeal from the County 
Court to the Court of Assistants, in the case of Richard Billings, respecting land. 

1664. Richard Goodman had a servant named John Mardin. He ran away and stole 
a gun, powder and a hdkf. He was taken at Windsor: and was sentenced to be whipped 
10 stripes. The damages and expenses amounted to £5.0.4, and he was to pay this, by 
serving his master six months after his apprenticeship had expired. 

1665. The legatees of John Barnard demanded of Andrew Warner, pay for a malt-house, 
which was burnt down in his occupation. The parties agreed. 

1666. Thomas Meekins, the miller on the west side, was fined 3s. 4d. for not carrying 
his weights and measures to the sealer when notified. 

1666. Wm. Goodwin had a servant named Thomas Helme, and Stephen Terry had 
one named Joshua Wills. Both ran away, and took a horse from ^r. Goodwin and some 
other things. The horse valued at io£ was lost, and they were ordered to pay treble dam- 
age, 2°£> ^^'^ charges, £10, us. Helme was to serve Mr. Goodwin two years and Wills 
to serve him 18 months, and Mr. Terry 6 months, after their time had expired. Also both 
fined 40 shillings each. 

1668. Sept. Hadley was presented for one or two defective bridges, in the way between 
Hadley and Chickopee river. They amended the defects, and were discharged. 


Death of Samuel Nash and Decision of the Court. 

"May 23, 1668. A Jury of twelve men was summoned by the Constable of Hadley to 
enquire concerning the sudden and untimely death of Samuel, son of Timothy Nash. 

The child was about 9 or 10 years old. Mr. Henry Clark and Andrew Bacon gave the 
jury their oath. They, after diligent search respecting the cause of this death, did find: — 
'That said boy coming riding upon a mare from pasture, having a long rope fastened about 
the mare's neck, & fastened about the boy's waist, a dog coming out, frightened the mare, 
so that the mare threw the boy & ran away with him, dragging him about 40 rods, and 
broke over five rails, the rails being broken down, he was dragged over them into and through 
a narrow gate, into his father's yard, and died forthwith.' [Signed by 12 Hadley men.] 

"Att a County Corte* holden at Northampton ye 30th day of ye ist Month 1669 [March 
30, 1669.] 

"Tymothy Nash of Hadley presenting a complaynt this winter before ye worshipfull 
Capt. Pynchon against Mr Goodwin concerning the untimely death of his child ye last sum- 
mer, and the sde Capt Pynchon by warrant under his hand dated Feb. 27 — 68 warning the 
sde Mr Goodwin to appeare at this Corte, he being very weake in body & not able to attend 
ye Corte in his own person, Mr Andrew Bacon and William Lewis appeared to answer on 
his behalfe. And now at this Corte the sde Timothy Nash presented his complt in that his 
child, a member of this Common Wealth is lost; and that as he apprehends by means of 
Mr. Goodwins dog frightening the mare upon which the child rode shee throwing the child. 

The Corte having heard ye case long debated & considered ye allegations & evidences on 
all hands doe conceive & judge yt there is not ground to lay such blame on Mr. Goodwin 
as is pretended in the sde Timothy Nash his complt, for yt it doth not appeare yt Mr. Good, 
win or Mrs. Goodwin had sufficient notice given them of their dogs curstness or any due 
warning to restrayne their dog; and therefore the Corte doth acquitt them, as to have such 
legall warning as aforesaid; But yet inasmuch as it appeares that the sde dog was something 
more than ordinary active in running after persons riding their horses in ye street whereby 
diverse persons have had falls from their horses. This Corte doth apprehend that Mr. 
Goodwin or Mrs. Goodwin might probably know something yt way, and Mr. Crow who 
exercised care about Mr. Goodwin's affaires: And therefore yt they may be blame worthy 
in not taking care as they ought, to have restraynd that dog. And therefore this Corte 
doth beare witness against all neglects in such matters whereby the lives of persons may be 
hazzarded. Also ye Corte apprehends that the said dog hath been partly an occasion of 
the death of the said child, though yet divers other things did concur to yt sad accident, but 
specially the child's winding a rope about its own wast ye other end whereof was tyed about 
ye mare's neck, & the child having nothing whereby he might well rule her, yt when shee 
threw ye child, shee dragged him after her to its destruction. 

Wherefore the Corte also accounteth Goodm. Nash or his Wife blame worthy in not have- 
ing a more strict watch over their son, but letting him go to fetch ye mare from pasture with 
such meane tackling. And there being much trouble in hearing this case, the Corte ordered 
yt Mr. Goodwin and Goodman Nash shall pay los. apiece towards defraying Corte charges." 

Remarks by Rev. Sylvester Nash. — The decision of the Court obviously turned on a legal 
quibble, viz., the want of legal notice, while the court allowed that Mr. Goodwin probably 
knew of his dog's curstness. And well they might, if diverse persons had been thrown from 
their horses, endangering their lives! The decision may be deemed at least a legal 

1669. The names of several persons in Hadley were returned to the court, for not living 
under family government. The court ordered the selectmen of Hadley to inquire into such 
disorders, and settle young persons under government, according to law. 

1670. Richard Fellows (son of Richard) and Benjamin Allen, of the west side, for com- 
ing into the yard of Thomas Meekins, Jr. and cutting off the hair of the mane and tail of 
his horse, were fined one 30s., the other 15s. Allen was a servant. 

1670. March. Mr. Russell's negro servant, Margaret, had a child, and was to be 
whipped 15 stripes; and the father, John Garret, was to be whipped 24 stripes, and pay to 
Mr. Russell £7, los. 

♦Corte is a contraction of the recorder for Courte. 


1674. Hezekiah Dickinson sued Garret Tueason of Albany. Jury found for Dickinson, 
16 pounds of beaver, and costs, 29s. 6d. [There was some trade by people on this river 
with the Dutch at Albany.] 

1675. March. Joseph Selding was presented for cutting and disfiguring John Smith's 
horse. Maj. Pynchon was directed to deal with him. 

1676. Sept. Joseph Selding was fined 20 shillings for abusing the Constable. 

Great Riot in Hadley, chiefly of young men, Feb. 15, 1676. — 
At March court, 1676, nine men were charged with being actors 
in a riotous assembly in Hadley, on the 15th of February, where 
there was a public aff^ronting of authority, in the stopping and 
hindering of the execution of a sentence which was ordered by 
authority. The record does not tell what the sentence was, nor 
against whom it was directed. It was in the time of Philip's war, 
when there were many soldiers in Hadley. 

Edward Granris was a leader in the riotous assembly, and said the sentence should not 
be executed. He was adjudged to be whipped 12 stripes, well laid on. Jonathan Gilbert, 
Jr. and Joseph Selding were bound in a bond of 10 pounds each for good behavior. Thomas 
Dickinson was fined 3^. Nehemiah Dickinson, William Rooker, Thomas Croft and 
Jonathan Marsh were fined ^£ each. Samuel Barnard was present in the riotous assembly 
with his club, though his father, Francis Barnard, commanded him not to be there, and he 
was accused of plotting with some of the garrison soldiers to go to Narraganset. The court 
adjudged him to be whipped 12 stripes, but he made a humble acknowledgment, and his 
father pleaded for him, and his sentence was changed to a fine of ^£. 

1677. Daniel Hovey vs. Mr. John Russell, Jr. for defaming him at the last court in 
Springfield, by saying he was a man of scandalous life. Jury brought in for Hovey, cost 
of court, 33s. 6d. 

1677. John Fisher of Hadley, for slandering and reviling Thomas Beaman of Hatfield 

and his mother, saying that he was the son of a w and that his mother was a witch and 

that he looked like one, was ordered to pay the county 20s. and Thomas Beaman 40s. [To 
say that a person was a witch and had bewitched any one, was slanderous and actionable 
in England. — Comyns.] 

1677. Thomas Beaman was ordered to pay los. to the county and los. to John Fisher, 
for falling upon him and beating him. 

1678. Jane Jackson, servant of Lt. Philip Smith, had stolen from her master, and then 
lied about it. Sentenced to be whipped 20 lashes, upon her naked back which punishment 
was performed in Court. [She would have been hanged for stealing in England.] 

1682. Gershom Hawks for having a pack of cards and refusing to tell whose they were, 
was fined 20s. 

1682. March. Joseph Kellogg, Jr. and Gershom Hawks were fined los. each for breach 
of the Sabbath, having traveled till midnight in the night before the Sabbath. 

1683. William Wake, a vagabond, for enticing away the servant of Joseph Selding, and 
stealing some of his goods, was adjudged to be whipped on his naked body 20 lashes, well 
laid on. 

1686. March. Cyrus, Mr. Russell's negro, for fraudulent dealings with the Indians 
and violent carriages in his master's house, was to be whipped 15 stripes at Hadley, on the 
next lecture day, or pay 50s. to satisfy the Indians, &c. 

1690. An illegitimate child was born in Hadley in 1690, the only white child born out 
of wedlock in Hadley in the 17th century. The parents were married a few months after. 

1693. Mr. Peter Golding of Hadley was fined c,£ for scurrilous and vilifying expressions 
respecting Peter Tilton, Esq., charging him with packing a court, &c. Mr. Golding appealed 
to the Superior Court at Charlestown. 

1696. Joseph Selden, (or Selding,) being in the court room when two of his relatives 
named Church were fined 20s. each for abusing the constable, spoke out, and said there 
was no color of law in what was done; that the men were not guilty; and when in discourse, 
Samuel Partridge, Esq., one of the justices, said, "so it seems," Selden, in a scoffing manner 


replied, "so it seems," and again Partridge said "so it seems," and again Selden replied 
"so it seems." Further, Selden took up the tongs in the room where the justices sat and 
lit his pipe, and threw down the tongs violently and used many unhandsome expressions. 
He was fined 20 shillings. [This Joseph Selden, so passionate and unruly in Hadley, 
became a wealthy and respectable man, in the north part of Lyme, Conn.] 

Wearing of the river. — In 1692, the year of the great flood, the river did much damage to 
the county road at the south end of the town (village.) The court appointed three men of 
Northampton, to join with the selectmen of Hadley, and consider what must be done to 
settle said highway. — The river had been wearing there some years. This is the first notice 
of it by the County Court. 

Law regulating dress. — Sumptuary laws restraining excess of 
apparel in some classes, were common in England and other 
nations for centuries. Massachusetts enacted such a law in 1651, 
ordering that persons whose estates did not exceed 200 pounds, 
and those dependent on them, should not wear gold or silver lace, 
gold or silver buttons, bone lace above 2s. per yard, or silk hoods 
or scarfs, upon penalty of los. for each offense. Any persons 
wearing such articles might be assessed in country rates, as if 
they had estates of 200 pounds. 

The first attempt to have this law observed in Hampshire, was 
made in 1673. At the March court, 25 wives and 5 maids, be- 
longing to Springfield, Northampton, Hadley, Hatfield and West- 
field, were presented by the jury, as persons of small estate, who 
"use to wear silk contrary to law." Six of these belonged to 
Hadley, viz.. 

Wife of John Westcarr — was acquitted. 

Joseph Barnard— was fined los. and cost, 2s. 6d. 
Thomas Wells, Jr. — was admonished. 
Edward Grannis — was admonished. 
Joseph Kellogg — was acquitted. 

Maid, Mary Broughton^was admonished. 
Of the thirty, only three were fined, and the fines were remitted 
at the next court. 

At the March court, 1674, the wife of Edward Grannis was 
again presented for wearing silk. Her silk hood and scarf were 
brought into court, and ''though something worn, they had been 
good silk." She was fined 10 shillings. 

At the March court, 1676, the jury presented 68 persons, from 
five towns, viz., 38 wives and maids, and 30 young men, "some 
for wearing silk and that in a flaunting manner, and others for 
long hair and other extravagancies." Two were fined 10 shil- 
lings, and many of the others were ordered to pay the clerk's fees, 
2s. 6d. each. There were ten from Hadley, viz., Joseph Barnard 
and his wife Sarah, and his sister Sarah, William Rooker, Thomas 
Crofts, Jonathan Wells, Joseph Grannis, Nehemiah Dickinson, 


wife of Mark Warner; and the wife of Thomas Wells, Jr. who 
was fined lo shillings. Nine were admonished and ordered to 
pay the clerk's fees. Several of the 68 presented were wives, 
daughters or sons of men of good estate. Two unmarried 
daughters of Elder John Strong of Northampton were of this 

In January, 1677, Mrs. Hannah Westcarr, "for wearing silk 
in a flaunting garb, to the great offence of several sober persons 
in Hadley" was admonished to reform. Her husband died the 
year before and left her an estate of 431 pounds. At the same 
court, a daughter of Joseph Baldwin, Jr., the wives of Joseph 
Gaylord and Thomas Selding, Ruth Warner and Mercy Hubbard, 
for wearing silk contrary to law, and two of them for wearing it 
"in a flaunting manner, and excess of apparel to the offence of 
sober people," were admonished and ordered to pay the clerk's 
fees and the witnesses. Andrew Warner, the father of Ruth, was 
worth 356;^. If Mercy Hubbard was a daughter of John H., her 
father died worth 1063;^. Estates seem not to have been much 

In March, 1678, 8 females of Northampton, Springfield, &c. 
were complained of for wearing silk contrary to law, in this day 
of calamity and trouble. Two were fined 10 shillings, some paid 
clerk's fees, and some were referred to another court. 

The boldest of these females was Hannah Lyman, 16 years of 
age, daughter of Richard Lyman, of Northampton, deceased. 
She was presented September, 1676, "for wearing silk in a flaunt- 
ing manner in an offensive way and garb, not only before, but 
when she stood presented, not only in ordinary but in extraor- 
dinary times." She was fined los., Jan. 1677. 

The March Courts in those days were held at the house of 
U- Henry Woodward in Northampton, who kept an ordinary, near 
where Samuel F. Lyman now resides. Most of these women and 
men from five towns, came to this house, and appeared before 
the judges in the court-room. They, and the spectators attracted 
by the novelty of the scene, must have filled the house. Those on 
the bench when the females appeared in court, March, 1673, were 
John Pynchon and Elizur Holyoke of Springfield, William 
Clarke of Northampton, and Henry Clarke of Hadley. 

In September, 1682, the selectmen of the five towns were all 
presented to the court, for not assessing according to law, their 
inhabitants that wore silk and were excessive in their apparel. 
The court endeavored to stir up the selectmen to assess those 
wearing unsuitable and excessive apparel, but it was too late; 


the women had already gained the victory, and no longer feared 
fines or taxes for wearing silks. — Many good men lamented the 
extravagance of the age, and the love of finery, among the women. 

Expenses of Hampshire Courts. — Their sessions continued 
one, two or three days. The commissioners or judges, jurors 
and a constable, or marshal, making i6 to i8 persons, dined to- 
gether, or dined at the same price, every court day, at the ordinary 
where the court sat, and those from other towns had supper, 
lodging, and breakfast. Some wine and considerable beer were 
drank. The judges and jurymen of these upper towns, in order 
to attend court one day at Springfield, had to be absent two nights. 
They lived well, the ordinary keeper charging much more than 
the common price for their meals. Their food, drink and horse- 
keeping, which were paid for by the county, seem to have been 
the principal compensation that they received. John Pynchon 
kept an account of the court expenses at the ordinaries, but 
neither he nor the recorder of the courts noticed the pay of the 
judges and jurors, and what they received is unknown. Many 
of the entries of actions and of the fines, and sometimes a part of 
the county rate, seem to have been required to pay the ordinary 
keepers for court expenses, which amounted to from 4 to g£ at 
each court. The record twice mentions that most of the county 
rate was needed to pay the county reward for killing wolves. 
The keepers of ordinaries received nothing directly for the room 
used by the court and fire. Litigation was not cheap in Massa- 
chusetts. Every person that sued another in a county court was 
required to pay 10 shillings for the entry of his action. 

Hampshire Transportation down and up the river. — All the 
produce that went to Boston was carried down the river, and all 
the merchandise from that place, except some light articles, was 
brought up the river. At Springfield, they had small boats, 
carrying perhaps two, three or four tons, which, in the accounts 
of William Pynchon and John Pynchon, were named canoes. 
Each boat was managed by two men down and up the river and 
falls, (now called Enfield Falls.) Grain was carried to Hartford 
in these boats, sometimes at 4d. or 5d. per bushel, but a more 
common price was 6 pence. Barrels of flour and pork were 
carried at is. gd. to 2s. each, and hhds. of beaver at 2s. 6d. each. 
Goods were brought up at 12 shillings per ton, hhds. at 3s. 
(probably of 63 gallons,) and salt at 6d. to 8d. per bushel. 

For some years, Northampton and Hadley carted their grain 
to Windsor, through Westfield, but as early as 1667 and 1668, 
Samuel Porter and John Smith of Hadley, had a boat on the 


river and boated some for Pynchon. After a road was laid near 
the Connecticut in 1673, if not before, Hadley had a landing- 
place on the river below Willimanset Falls, and Northampton 
and Hatfield had one on the west side. Grain was carted from 
Hadley to the landing at 4 pence per bushel, or ten shillings for 
a cart-load of 30 bushels. The freight from this landing to 
Springfield was two pence per bushel. The freight of grain from 
Hadley to Hartford was usually one shilling per bushel, but 
sometimes one or two pence less. In Pynchon's books, the price 
of a bushel of grain received at Northampton or Hadley, was 
always 6 pence less than when received at Springfield, and one 
shilling less than at Hartford. Grain was conveyed from Hart- 
ford, Stratford, &c. to Boston for 6 pence per bushel. Barrelsof pork 
and flour, both large, were carried from Hadley to Hartford for 
3s. 6d. to 4s. per barrel, and from Hartford to Boston at about 3s. 

It is supposed that the first settlers of Hadley and Hatfield 
came up on the Northampton "cartway to Windsor," having 
their own horses, oxen and carts to convey the women and chil- 
dren and some of the men, and the household goods and farming 
implements. The Springfield boats sometimes brought up the 
furniture of families removing. 

Sleds in Hampshire. — The first settlers of New England knew 
nothing about sleds and sleighs, nor did they use them for some 
years. Heavy sleds were used long before sleighs. In Hamp- 
shire, wood was sometimes sledded before 1670, but in general, 
it was carted long after that date. For many years, logs were 
conveyed to saw-pits and saw-mills on wheels, and almost every 
thing was carted. In 1683, Hatfield voted that all men and 
teams should turn out on the 5th and 6th of November, and cut 
and cart Mr. Chauncey's wood. Here were 60 cords of green 
wood to be carted three weeks before winter. Logs were carted 
to John Pynchon's saw-mill for some years after 1667, but in 
1674 he bought a sled and many logs were sledded. Sleds did 
not convey produce to Hartford from this valley, or from Spring- 
field, till the latter part of the century, and perhaps not till after 
1700. Oxen seem not to have been shod in Hampshire in the 
17th century. The people did not keep open sled roads in the 
winter, even for 15 or 20 miles. There were no sleigh-rides in 
these towns till after 1730 or 1740. 

Prices of Grain in Hampshire in the 17TH Century. 

The prices of grain in Hadley, for the payment of their minister, 
school-masters, town rates and private debts, for near 40 years, 


were as follows: — winter wheat, 3s. 6d., summer wheat, 3s., peas, 
2s. 6d., Indian corn, 2s. Rye was raised after 1680, and the price 
was 2s. 6d. Barley was sometimes 3s. and malt, 3s. 6d., meslin, 
3s. and oats, is. 6d. The prices were nearly the same in North- 
ampton and Hatfield. Winter wheat was sometimes 3s. 6d. 
The money prices of grain, when noticed, which was not often, 
were one-fourth less, and sometimes still lower. — The nominal 
prices advanced in Hadley a year or two before 1700. Winter 
wheat was 4s., summer wheat, 3s. 6d., peas, 3s. and rye, 3s. 
Indian corn was 2s. as before. One-third was deducted from 
these prices to bring them to what were called money prices, 
which were for winter wheat, 2s. 8d., summer wheat, 2s. 4d., 
peas and rye, 2s. and corn, is. 4d. The value of thecoins referred 
to as money, did not vary much from 6s. 8d. for an ounce of silver, 
or 6 shillings for a piece of eight, or Spanish dollar. 

Flour in Hadley and Northampton was sold at from ii to 12 
shillings for 1 1 2 pounds. It was about one shilling per cwt. higher 
at Springfield and near 2 shillings at Hartford. Most of the 
barrels held from 260 to 280 pounds, and some above 300 pounds. 
The price of barrels was from 2s. to 2s. 6d. A bushel of spring 
wheat yielded about 34 pounds of good flour. 

John Pynchon's prices at Springfield, which he called "town 
prices," for about 40 years, were for winter wheat, 4s., summer 
wheat, 3s. 6d., peas, 2s. 6d. to 3s., rye, 3s., Indian corn, 2s. 6d. 
His prices were commonly about 6 pence a bushel higher than 
those at Northampton and Hadley. He sometimes sent to Boston 
more than 2000 bushels of wheat and peas in a year. Indian 
corn was not sent to Boston. A large portion of the wheat raised 
in Hampshire and Connecticut was spring wheat, usually called 
summer wheat in the 17th century. 

In Connecticut, the prices of grain received for country rates, 
as fixed by the General Court for near half a century, were for 
winter wheat, 4s. 6d., summer wheat, 4s., peas and rye, 3s., 
Indian corn, 2s. 6d. There were a few variations. W^inter 
wheat was not named till 1677. These were the common prices at 
Hartford, and had much influence on the prices up the river, 
especially of wheat. After 1680, one-third of the tax was to be 
abated, if paid in money, and for three years, one-half was to be 
abated, if paid in money. This was reducing grain to very low 
prices in money. 

Massachusetts received grain for country rates at higher prices. 
For more than 40 years, with a few exceptions, wheat, without 
any distinction of winter and summer, was 5s.; barley, malt, peas 


and rye, 4s.; Indian corn, 3s. After 1672, one-quarter or one- 
third of the tax was to be abated if paid in money, and for two 
years, one-half was to be abated for money. 

Grain and other articles at colony prices were called "country 
pay" or "provision pay" or simply "pay;" in Hampshire, pro- 
duce at town prices was sometimes called "provision pay" or 

Hampshire Contributions for Harvard College. — A contribu- 
tion was made throughout the colony, commencing in 1672, for 
a new college building. About ;^I989 were received from towns 
and individuals, in a few years. " A fair and stately brick edifice " 
was erected. The contributions in produce from the Hampshire 
towns, after taking out the expense of transportation, were as 
follows : 



Springfield, . 



Northampton contributed ;^ in flax, summer wheat, and 
flour, but the freight, shrinkage, casks, &c. reduced it almost 




















Lands in New England before it was settled by the English^Indian Burnings — Bushes — 
Burnings by the English — Wood and Timber — Fire-wood — Building Timber — Rift 
Timber — Clapboards — Saw-logs — Pasturing domestic animals in the woods. 

New England was far from being an unbroken wilderness 
when first settled by the English. In the vicinity of the Indian 
settlements, there were not only plats of cleared land, upon which 
the squaws raised Indian corn, beans and squashes, but many 
openings where the earth was covered with grass, and extensive 
tracts of woodland, where the trees were so scattered that green 
herbage, and even strawberries, flourished among them. The 
early writers compared these thin forests to the English parks. 
Mr. Graves, wrote from Salem, in 1629, that the country was 
"very beautiful in open lands mixed with goodly woods, and 
again open plains, in some places 500 acres, some more some less, 
not much troublesome to clear for the plough." "The grass and 


weeds grow up to a man's face; in the lowlands and by fresh rivers 
abundance of grass, and large meadows without any tree or shrub." 

The burning of the grass and leaves by the Indians is noticed 
by Morton, in 1632. He says the savages burn the country that 
it may not be overgrown with underwood. The burning makes 
the country passable by destroying the brush-wood. It scorches 
the older trees and hinders their growth. "The trees grow here 
and there as in our parks, and make the country very beautiful." 
Wood, in 1634, says, "in many places, divers acres are clear, so 
that one may ride a hunting in most places of the land. There is 
no underwood, save in swamps and low grounds; for it being the 
custom of the Indians to burn the woods in November, when the 
grass is withered and leaves dried, it consumes all the underwood 
and rubbish." He says there is good fodder in the woods where 
the trees are thin; and in the spring, the grass grows rapidly on 
the burnt lands. Vanderdonck, a Dutch writer, in his "Des- 
cription of the New Netherlands," now New York, about 1653, 
describes the burning of the woods. "The Indians have a yearly 
custom, which some of our Christians have adopted, of burning 
the woods, plains and meadows, in the fall of the year, when the 
leaves have fallen and the grass and vegetables are dry. This 
'bush-burning,' as it is called, is done to render hunting easier, 
and to make the grass grow. The raging fire presents a grand 
and sublime appearance. Green trees in the woodlands do not 
suffer much." 

These accounts, relating to other parts of the country, will help 
us to form some general idea of the lands, forests, and natural 
scenery in the vicinity of the Connecticut, when first possessed 
by the English. No early writer has given a description of this 
part of Massachusetts, nor indeed of any portion of the country 
on the borders of this river, but we may safely conclude that there 
were Indian corn-fields, green meadows, grassy uplands in scat- 
tered, open woods, and dense forests on wet lands, in this Nor- 
wottuck valley. There was wild, and perhaps gloomy scenery, 
but there must have been much that was pleasant and beautiful. 

The first planters of New England were entirely unaccustomed 
to the business of clearing woodlands, and they selected places 
where they could immediately begin to cultivate the earth. They 
found the best lands generally divested of timber. The inter- 
vales or rich alluvial lands, upon the Connecticut and its tributary 
streams, were more free from trees than the adjoining uplands. 
The first settlers of Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield, found 
plenty of land ready for the plow, and began to raise Indian corn 


and other grain, and to mow grass, as soon as they had fixed 
themselves in these places. Nor did their homelots upon higher 
ground require much clearing. The upland woods on each 
side of the river, above and below these towns, were passable for 
men on horseback, and with little preparation, for carts. In 
Philip's war, and in later years, companies of horsemen, and 
larger bodies of foot soldiers seem to have penetrated the woods 
without difficulty in every direction. 

Growth of Bushes. — After the Indians ceased to burn over a 
tract of land, bushes and brambles commonly began to grow 
abundantly upon it. When some of the people of Northampton 
petitioned for a plantation at Squakeag (Northfield) in 1671, 
they stated that the Indians had deserted the place, and that for 
want of inhabitants to burn the meadows and woods, the under- 
wood had increased, "which will be very prejudicial to those that 
shall come to inhabit, and the longer, the worse." The inhabit- 
ants upon Connecticut River were greatly annoyed by the bushes 
that sprung up so plentifully in their homelots, highways and 
elsewhere. There was so little travel within and between the 
towns with wheels and two animals abreast, that the bushes 
choked up the ways and it was difficult to keep an open path. In 
Connecticut, a law obliged every man to work one day in the year 
in clearing bushes from the highways. Hadley adopted a sim- 
ilar by-law in 1693. 

Burning over the lands by the English. — The woods were for 
a long time the pasture grounds for all kinds of domestic animals. 
The inhabitants fired them annually, as the Indians had done 
before. They did not set fires near their habitations and fenced 
fields, but in the more distant parts of the township. Massa- 
chusetts enacted a law forbidding any person to set the common 
woodlands on fire, except between March loth and April 30th. 

According to tradition, there were some splendid burnings in 
the woods on the hills and mountains, around this valley, espe- 
cially in the night. The people of Hadley not only burnt over 
their own lands, but extended their fires to the hills of Pelham 
and Belchertown, in order to increase their pasturage. Brook- 
field burnt over the lands in Ware, and they were called "Brook- 
field pastures." Northampton and Hatfield spread their fires 
westerly over the hills of Westhampton, Williamsburgh, &c. 
These burnings continued in many places down to 1750, and 
later. A law of Massachusetts in 1743, made to restrain such 
fires, says the burning of the woods greatly impoverishes the soil, 
prevents the growth of the wood, and destroys much fence. Tra- 


ditional accounts say that the woods were so free from underbrush 
and the trees so thinly scattered, that a deer could be seen 40 rods 
on the wooded hills. The burnings were as favorable to the 
white deer-hunters as they were of old to the Indian hunters. 

Wood and Timber. — The annual burnings by the Indians, and 
afterwards by the whites, destroyed small trees and hindered 
the growth of large ones, and valuable timber was not so plenty 
as some have imagined. Some of the towns on the river had fears 
about a scarcity of timber in early days. Springfield voted in 
1647, that no timber, boards, planks, shingle-timber, nor pipe 
staves should be carried out of the town, from the east side of the 
river. Hatfield voted, in 167 1, that no man should sell clapboards, 
shingles or rails, out of the town, and coopering stuff was not to 
be sold out of the town until wrought into casks. In May, 1706, 
this prohibition was so far relaxed as to permit John Field, jr. to 
transport shingles "to supply those whose houses were burnt 
down in Hadley."* Northampton, in 1699, "considering the 
great difficulty we are in to get fire-wood," ordered that no staddles 
should be cut, that were less than 9 inches in diameter. Hadley, 
in 1713, ordered that no oak staddles under 12 inches in diameter 
should be cut, on penalty of five shillings. These town votes all 
relate to common lands. They clearly evince that timber was 
not very abundant. 

Fire-wood. — Much of the fuel consumed in Hadley, during the 
17th, and a great part of the i8th century, was oak and walnut. 
From some regulations in 1733 and 1737, it appears that oak, 
walnut, maple and elm were then chiefly used. Pine, chestnut 
and other soft woods, were not extensively employed as fuel until 
a much more recent period. From the supplies of wood given to 
clergymen, some idea may be gained, of the great quantities of 
wood consumed in the spacious fire-places of former days. Hat- 
field at first gave Mr. Chauncey 50 cords of wood annually, and 
afterwards 60 cords. South Hadley voted from 50 to 70 loads 
of wood yearly, for Mr. Woodbridge. Hadley gave Mr. Hopkins 
50 cords, many years. The third precinct in Hadley, now Am- 
herst, gave Mr. Parsons, their first minister, 80 loads of wood 
some years, and 90 loads in 1749. Mr. Edwards of Northampton, 
after 1740, consumed from 75 to 80 loads of wood in a year. 
Wethersfield gave Mr. Woodbridge, (settled in 1680,) 80 loads of 
wood — probably over 50 cords. Some persons who had not a 

♦This is the only record that remains of the burning of houses in Hadley, in the early 
part of 1706. 


Study to warm consumed as much wood as the ministers, or about 
50 cords. When Hadley had only 100 families, about 1765, the 
consumption of wood was not much less than 3000 cords annually. 

Building Timber, &c. — The first settlers of New England 
knew the value of oak, but did not at first understand the impor- 
tance of pine. In many places, they not only used oak timber 
for the frames of buildings, but oak clapboards and oak shingles, 
and some used oak boards to wainscot rooms. Posts, pails and 
rails were of oak. Where pine was plenty, pine boards were 
sawed perhaps as early as oak boards, and pine shingles and 
clapboards gradually took the place of those of oak. How early 
the people of Hadley began to use chestnut for posts and rails, is not 
known. They may have split out chestnut rails for some of their 
early meadow and homelot fences, but there is no evidence of this. 

The Norwottuck valley was to a considerable extent an ever- 
green region. Pines predominated in many places in Hadley, 
but were mingled with oaks and other trees. 

Rift Timber. — This kind of timber could be rived, cleaved or 
split. One of the first votes of the early settlers of Hadley related 
to it. "Dec. 17, 1660, voted that if any men fell any rift timber, 
and do not rive it out into bolts, pales, rails, clapboards, or 
shingles, within six weeks, any inhabitant may fetch it away for 
his own use; and that if any man fell any pine timber, and cart 
it not away in three months, any man may make use of it." This 
vote makes a distinction between" rift timber" and "pine timber." 
The former was apparently oak. The articles into which it was 
rived require some explanation. 

Bolts denoted pieces of wood cleft out, in order to be split again 
into shingles, laths, &c. Pales were stakes, posts, and any 
cloven pieces of timber placed upright for a fence. The picket 
fences of door-yards are a light kind of paling. Rails were used 
for post and rail fences. Our fathers had to learn how to split 
rails from logs after they came to this country. Zigzag or Vir- 
ginia fences were unknown. Shingles of oak and pine in New 
England in early days, were from 14 inches to 3 feet in length. 
John Pynchon, when he built his brick house in 1660, put on 
shingles 18 inches long, and an inch thick at the thick end; but 
for several other buildings, he used shingles 3 feet long. He had 
cedar shingles for a building in 1677. He gave for shingles 18 
inches long, 20 shillings per thousand, and for the 3 feet shingles, 
from 35 to 40 shillings. 

Clapboards. — Coffin's History of Newbury gives a satisfactory 
derivation of this word. "Clapboards, he says, v/ere originally 


cloven and not sawn, and were thence called clove-boards, and 
in process of time, cloboards, claboards, clapboards." It is 
quite certain that clapboards were cloven in the manner of shingles 
in New England, more than a century. In England, an act of 
Parliament under Elizabeth, 1592-3, names the timber of which 
beer and fish casks were made, "cloven-borde" and "clapborde." 
English writers represent that clapboards in that country were 
used by the cooper for casks, and not by the joiner on buildings. 

The use of short, narrow, cloven boards, over-lapping each 
other, to cover the outside of buildings, seems to have been a con- 
trivance of the early settlers of New England, before they had 
saw-mills, and sawn boards were scarce and dear. It may be 
that they had been previously so used in some parts of Europe. 
In this country, they were at first split from oak, and afterwards 
from pine, and made smooth by "hewing,"* or shaving. The 
wages of "rivers of clapboards" and the price of clapboards, were 
regulated by law in some places. Their length for a time was 
various — 3, 4, 5 or 6 feet. In the i8th century, the laws of Mass- 
achusetts ordered that pine clapboards exposed for sale, should 
be 4 feet 6 inches long, 5 inches broad and f of an inch thick on 
the back, and be straight and "well shaved." The last law 
ordering such clapboards was passed in the year 1783. Such 
short, split, shaved clapboards may still be seen on some old 
houses, built before the Revolution, in Northampton, Hadley and 
other places. 

Saw-logs. — John Pynchon built saw-mills in Springfield, Suf- 
field and Enfield. After his first saw-mill in Springfield was 
built in 1667, he hired men to cut logs ready for the saw at 8 
pence each; and others were engaged to cart them to the mill 
with their own teams, at is. 8d. each. They were to be between 
12 and 25 feet in length and from 17 to 24 inches in diameter, 
at the small end. Most of them were pine. White oak logs 
cost much more. In 1684, he gave for pine logs at the mill at the 
rate of is. 3d. for every hundred feet of boards v.hich they made. 
In 1690, Clark and Parsons of Northampton, gave for pine logs 
at the rate of is. 6d. for every hundred feet of boards sawed from 

Price of Boards. — Those sawed by hand at Springfield had 
risen to 7 shillings per 100 feet, before Pynchon built his mill in 
1667. After that his price was 4s. 6d. per 100 feet. The price of 
Clark and Parsons, of Northampton, for many years after 1682, 

*The operation of smoothing clapboards and shingles was called "hewing" for many 
years. Afterwards, they were said to be "shaved." 


was 4s. per lOO feet. Their charge for sawing boards for others 
was 2s. 6d. per lOO feet. Hadley prices did not probably vary 
much from those of Northampton. These prices of logs and 
boards were all in "provision pay." 

Laths for plastering are rarely named in the writings of the 
17th century. The houses of farmers had very little plastering. 
The wealthy plastered their rooms. 

Pasturing domestic animals in the woods. — The first pastures 
in this and other British colonies were the woods, which had 
previously been the hunting grounds of the Indians. The in- 
habitants of the Norwottuck valley had a very wide range for 
their cattle, more than half a century. The great pasture of 
Hadley extended to the north indefinitely, until Sunderland was 
begun in 1714; and the eastern limit was Brookfield, or the 
"Brookfield pastures" in Ware, until Amherst was commenced, 
about 1728. The nearest inhabitants to the south, were in the 
vicinity of Chickopee River, in Springfield, previous to the settle- 
ment of South Hadley, about 1725. Horses, horned cattle, sheep 
and hogs were pastured upon these plains, hills and mountain 
sides. Goats apparently were not kept in Hadley, though some 
towns in the colony had many. Cows were under a keeper, and 
sheep after they were numerous enough for a shepherd. Young 
horses, hogs, and young cattle commonly roved without restraint, 
but the latter sometimes had a keeper. 

A cow-keeper or herdsman was employed in Hadley every year, 
but is seldom mentioned in the record, and information respect- 
ing this manner of pasturage must be sought in other towns. In 
Hatfield, in 1680 and 1681, a man agreed to keep the town herd 
from early in May to Sept. 29, for 12 shillings per week, payable 
in grain. He was to drive out the herd every morning by the 
time the sun was an hour high, take them to good feed and bring 
them home seasonably at night. In many places, the wages of a 
cowherd were 12 shillings per week; in some towns a little higher. 

A shepherd was not needed in Hadley and Hatfield for many 
years. Those who had a few sheep, kept them on their homelots 
and about the village, until the number was so much increased 
that the owners could afford to pay a shepherd. After shepherds 
were employed, the sheep in both towns were folded at night, 
and the manure was paid for by those on whose lands were the 
pens or folds. In Hatfield, the sheep were folded in hurdles 
or movable pens, which were carried from one place to another. 
The wages of a shepherd were ordinarily 12 shillings per week. 
Hatfield had 273 sheep in 1691 and 291 in 1699. The Hadley 


flock increased slowly. By a law of the colony, a dog that bit 
or killed sheep was to be hanged.* 

In Hatfield, the cow-keeper and shepherd enjoyed the privi- 
leges of most of the Sabbaths. In 1672, every man that had 
three cattle on the commons, was to take his turn in keeping the 
herd on Sabbath-days. In 1693, the shepherd was to keep the 
sheep every loth Sabbath, and the proprietors were to guard them 
9 Sabbaths in 10. In most of the towns, the owners of the herds 
and flocks took care of them, on many of the Sabbaths, that the 
keepers might attend public worship. 

It is presumed that horses and oxen, whose services were fre- 
quently called for, fed at the barns, on the homelots and in the 
broad streets. Oxen were at times under the care of the cowherd. 

As soon as the crops in the intervals were gathered, cows and 
some other animals were pastured in the meadows until snow 
fell. Hadley and Hatfield usually opened one meadow Sept. 
29th or about the first of October, and the others within a fort- 
night. Indian corn was gathered early. 

Young cattle and horses ranged the woods in every direction. 
In Hadley, they ascended Mount Holyoke to the steep rocks, 
and crossed the mountain in those gaps called cracks. In lyoQj 
the town gave John Taylor 20 acres of land, to maintain a fence 
across the crack of the mountain, meaning a gap, now about half 
a mile north-east of the mountain house. Cattle from the south 
side sometimes came through this opening into Hockanum and 
Fort Meadow. The common fields and private lots required 
strong barriers to protect them against restless, rambling animals. 

Young cattle and horses often remained in the woods until 
winter, and some became wild and unruly, especially horses, and 
wandered to other towns. Many days were spent in the winter 
and in other seasons in looking up horses and cattle in the woods. 
This mode of pasturing, though not without inconveniences, was 
the best that the new settlers in this and other colonies could adopt. 

Swine were not often killed by wolves or bears; according to 
tradition, they defended themselves and their young vigorously 
when attacked. 

*The hanging of mischievous dogs sometimes gave a name to the place where the exe- 
cution was performed. I have noticed the name, "Hang-dog swamp," both in Massachu- 
setts and Connecticut. The dog was taken to the woods, a leaning staddle was bent down 
and a cord was fastened to the top and to the dog's neck; the elastic staddle then sprung 
back, with the dog dangling in the air. In former days, cats and dogs were sometimes 
hanged at the heavy end of a well-swipe. 



Good land of little value to Indians— Purchases by Penn and Pynchon — Purchases of the 
Indians in Norwottuck Valley — Remarks on the Indian Deeds — How Hatfield was 
purchased — How much Hadley paid for land— The name Norwottuck. 

The Indians upon Connecticut River were very desirous that 
the Enghsh should settle among them. They willingly and gladly 
sold their lands; no urging was necessary. They understood 
what was meant by a sale of land. When the Norwottuck Indians 
sold the lands at Northampton in 1653, and at Hadley in 1658, 
they knew perfectly well what use the English made of the lands 
they had purchased in other places long before, and what they 
claimed under an Indian deed. The Indians never pretended 
that they were ignorant of what was intended by a sale of land, 
and no quarrels arose on that ground. 

The price obtained by the Indians for land, however small, was 
all they demanded, and in the opinion of intelligent men, all the 
land was worth. "Whoever is conversant with the hardships, 
toils and privations attending a new settlement in the wilderness, 
and will take the trouble to compute what is expended and laid 
out on and about a settlement to make land produce any thing; 
how much its value depends on neighboring settlements, on roads, 
fences and the various improvements of civilized life; will inevitaby 
come to the conclusion that wild land in a wilderness, remote 
from neighbors, cannot be of much value."* Gov. Hutchinson 
observed that land in New England, at the time of its settlement, 
was of no value. f 

Very erroneous opinions are entertained in regard to the value, 
to the Indians, of the land which they sold to the English. They 
manifestly were not conscious of giving up much that was useful 
or important to themselves. The Indian men were fond of fight- 
ing, hunting and fishing, and disdained other pursuits. All 
agricultural labor and all kinds of drudgery were thrown upon 
the women, who, with hoes of shells, wood or iron, cultivated 
small pieces of land. It may be doubted whether all the Indian 
corn-fields in this valley, from Holyoke and Tom on the south, 
to Toby and Sugar Loaf on the north, contained more than sev- 
enty acres. Agriculture was a minor object with the Indians. 

♦Bliss's Sketches of the History of Springfield, 1828. 
•j-As quoted by Trumbull. 


These fine intervals, which so much dehght the civiHzed man, 
had few attractions for the Indians. 

In Connecticut, the Indians in most of their deeds, retained 
the right to hunt, fowl and fish within the lands disposed of. So 
the Norwottuck Indians, in their deeds of land in Hadley and 
Hatfield, reserved to themselves the liberty of hunting and fowl- 
ing on the lands they sold, and of fishing in the streams; and in 
two of the deeds, they had liberty to set their wigwams and take 
fire-wood on the commons.* They had the same use of most of 
the land and water after the English came, that they had before. 
The women lost their corn-patches in the meadows. The men 
continued to hunt, fowl and fish, and the women to raise corn.f 

It was not rich land that principally induced the Indians to 
establish themselves in this valley or elsewhere. The most 
numerous tribes of New England Indians were not upon the best 
lands. The Pequots, the most powerful tribe in Connecticut, 
resided in one of the most sterile sections of the colony. The 
sandy, barren island of Nantucket, had as many Indians 200 years 
ago (if correctly estimated in 1659) ^^ ^^^ fertile lands upon the 
Connecticut in the whole course of the river. The Indians had 
no permanent settlements above Northfield, and they voluntarily 
deserted that place. 

Some European writers have been strangely ignorant of the 
fact, that most of the early settlers of New England occupied 
their lands by actual bargain with the Indians. These writers 
have represented that William Penn was the first to purchase a 
conveyance from the Indians, and have bestowed much praise 
upon him for doing what had been done a hundred times in New 
England, before Penn came to America.:}; 

Penn is said to have completed his bargain or treaty with the 
Indian chiefs under an elm tree near Philadelphia, and the trans- 
action has been rendered famous by the historian and the painter. 
Yet it would be difficult, perhaps, to tell why the purchase of 
Indian lands in Pennsylvania by Wm. Penn, is more worthy of 
renown, than the purchase of Indian lands in Northampton or 
Hadley by John Pynchon, 20 years before. Both bought as 
cheaply as they could. 

*Pres. Dwight says, in his Travels in New England, "the Indians were always consid- 
ered as having a right to dwell and to hunt within the lands which they had sold." Such 
a right seems to have been practically enjoyed, though not expressly reserved in all the deeds. 

•|-When the women took land of the English for half the crop, they may have obtained 
from well plowed land more corn than the same amount of labor produced when the land 
and all the crop were theirs. 

iGrahame, in his History of the United States, Vol. II, p. 346, has corrected the error 
of these writers. 


Deed of Northampton. 
This purchase was made by John Pynchon, Sept. 24, 1653, ^^ Springfield, (perhaps 
under an elm tree) of six Indians, two of whom appear as owners of land on the east side 
of the river, viz., Chickwallop ahas Wawhillowa, and Awonusk, wife of Wulluther. The 
tract of land purchased was at Nanotuck or Nonotuck, and extended from the brook below 
Munhan, called Sankwonk (now below Asahel Lyman's) up by the Quinetticott to the 
brook or gutter below Capawonk called Masquomp, (now called Half-way brook,) and 
out into the woods westerly nine miles. The consideration was 100 fathoms of wampum, 
10 coats and some small gifts; and the English were to plough up for the Indians, on the 
east side of the river, sixteen acres of land, in the summer of 1654. 

Capawonk Meadow in Hatfield. 

Northampton bought this of a chief, named Lampaunchus, or Umpanchala, July 20, 
1657, for 50 shillings. This meadow was then called Pewonganuck or Capawonk. In 
October, 1658, Northampton proposed to sell it to the "Hartford men,"on four conditions, 
(on page 11,) which were not complied with. Oh the nth of March, 1659, Joseph Fitch, 
John Webb and Joseph Parsons, in behalf of Northampton, agreed with William West- 
wood, Samuel Smith and Andrew Warner, acting for the purchasers of the new planta- 
tion on the east side of the river, to sell Capawonk Meadow, for 30 pounds sterling, in 
wheat and peas, delivered at Hartford at the current price, before June i, 1659. The 30 
pounds were paid at or near the time. The deed from Northampton agents to the agents 
of Hadley, was given Jan. 22, 1663. The bounds of Capawonk in the deed, were, the 
riverett running into the Great River easterly, the Great River south and east; and the 
bank of upland, north and west. 

The agreement of March 11, 1659, is the first instrument recorded in the first Book 
of Deeds at Springfield. Elizur Holyoke recorded it Dec. 2, 1660. 

Deed of Hadley. 

This deed embraces the land from the mouth of Fort River, and Mount Holyoke, on 
the south, to the mouth of Mohawk brook, and the southern part of Mount Toby on the 
north, extending easterly nine miles into the woods. 

"Here followeth a copy of a deed or writing -whereby the Indians of Nolwotogg, upon 
the river Quienecticott, made sale of certain lands unto Maj. John Pynchon, of Spring- 
field, together with the copy of the said Maj. John Pynchon his assignment of the said 
deed to the use and behoof of the inhabitants of Hadley, and his acknowledgment thereoft 

Be it known to all men by these presents that Chickwollop alias Wahillowa, Umpan- 
chella alias Womscom, and Quonquont alias Wompshaw, the sachems of Nolwotogg, and 
the sole and proper owners of all the land on the east side of Quonicticot river, from the 
hills called Petowamachu, and from the mouth of the brook or river called Towunuck- 
sett, and so all along by the great river upward or northward to the brook called Nepas- 
sooenegg, and from the hither part or south end of the great hills called Kunckquachu, 
(being guessed at near about nine miles in length) by the river Quenecticott — We the 
aforenamed Chickwallop alias Waahillow, Umpanchala alias Womscom, and Quonquont 
alias Wompshaw, of Nolwotogg, on the one party, do give, grant, bargain and sell unto 
John Pynchon, of Springfield, on the other party, to him, his assigns and successors for- 
ever, all the grounds, woods, ponds, waters, meadows, trees, stones, &c. lying on the east 
side of Quenicticot River, within the compass aforesaid, from the mouth of the little Riv- 
erett called Towenucksett, and the hills Petowomuchu northward up the great river of 
Quenecticot, to the Brook Nepowssooenegg, and from the south end of the hills Quaqua- 
chu, being near about nine miles in length, from the south part to the north part, and all 
within the compass from Quenecticot River eastward nine miles out into the woods, all 
the aforesaid tract of ground called Towunucksett, Sunmukquommuck, Suchaw, Noycoy, 
Gassek, Pomptuckset, Mattabaget, Wunnaquickset, Kunckkiunk-qualluck, Neposeo- 
neag, and to the south end of the great hill called Kunckquachu, and for nine or ten miles 
eastward from the great river out into the woods eastward — We the said Chickwallop, 
Umpanchella, and Quonquont, do for and in consideration of two hundred fathom of 
wampom, and twenty fathom and one large coat of eight fathom, which Chickwallop sets 


In the Churchyard at H a d l e \ , E n i, i a n n 

Table Stones in the Meadow C 

E M E T E R \ 


oflF, of trusts, besides several small gifts, and for other good causes and considerations do 
sell, give, grant, and have given, granted, bargained and sold to John Pynchon, of Spring- 
field, and to his assigns and successors all and singular the aforenamed land, or by what- 
ever other name it is or may be called, quietly to possess, have and enjoy the aforesaid 
tract of ground free from all molestations or incumbrances of Indians, and that forever, 
only the Indians aforenamed, and in particular Quonquont, doth reserve and keep one 
corn field about twelve, sixteen, or twenty acres of ground, a little above Mattabaget, by 
the brook called Wunnaquickset, lying on the south side of the said brook, and compassed 
in by a swamp from that brook to the great river, and also they reserve liberty to hunt deer, 
fowl, &c. and to take fish, beaver, or otter, &c. but otherwise all the aforesaid premises 
the said John Pynchon, his assigns and successors and their heirs shall forever enjoy abso- 
lutely and ciearly, free from all incumbrances of any Indians or their corn fields forever, 
except as before excepted. And in witness hereof, we the said Indians do subscribe our 
marks this present twenty-fifth day of December, 1658. It is only the corn field on this 
or south side of the brook called Wunnuckeckset, and the little bit of ground by it within 
the swamp and betwixt the swamp and the great river which the Indians do reserve, and 
are to enjoy. But the little corn field on the other side or further side or north side of 
Wunnaquickset, and all the other corn fields within the compass of ground aforenamed, 
the Indians are to leave and yield up, as witness their hands. 

The mark — of Umpanchla alias Womscom. 
The mark — of Quonquont alias Wompshaw. 
The mark — of Chickwalopp alias Wowahillowa. 

Witnesses to this purchase and that the Indians do fully sell all the lands aforementioned 
to Mr. Pynchon, and that the marks were subscribed by the Indians themselves. 

Joseph Parsons, 

Edwd. Elmore, 

Joseph Fitch, 

Samuel Wright, 

Arthur Williams, 

The mark R. T. of Rowland Thomas, who was privy to the whole discourse and con- 
clusion of the purchase, and Joseph Parsons was present and acquainted with the whole 
agreement; the other witnesses came in to testify to the subscribing, and that the Indians 
owned all as it was read to them. 

The Indians desired they might set their wigwams at some times within the tract of 
ground they sold without offence, and that the English would be kind and neighborly to 
them in not prohibiting them fire-wood out of the woods, &c. which was promised them." 

Assigned by John Pynchon to "the present Inhabitants of Hadley," Oct. 28, 1663 — 
in which he says he acted in the purchase as an agent entrusted by them. 

The corn-field of 12, 16 or 20 acres, reserved in the foregoing deed, was sold to Hadley 
in a few years. It seems to have been a part of the upper School Meadow. 

Deed of Hadley west of the River, or Hatfield. 

The land included in this deed, is bounded by Hatfield Mill River on the south, and the 
upper side of the Great or North Meadow on the north, extending westerly nine miles. 

"Here foUoweth a copy of a deed of sale whereby Umpanchala, an Indian Sachem 
formerly of Nolwotogg, did sell and alienate his right and interest in certain parcels of 
land on the west side of Quenecticot River, unto Maj. John Pynchon, of Springfield, for 
and in behalf of the inhabitants of Hadley, as also his, the said Maj. John Pynchon's 
assignment of the same to the said inhabitants, and acknowledgment of it likewise: 

Be it known unto all men by these presents that Umpanchala, alias Womscom, a sachem 
of Nolwotogg, on the one party, being a Chief and proper owner of the land on the west 
side of Quinecticot River, from Cappowoungomuck to the upper side of Mincomonk, (viz. 
to Quonquont 's ground) do give, grant, bargain and sell to John Pynchon of Springfield, 
on the other party, to him, his assigns and successors forever, all the grounds, woods, ponds, 
waters, trees, stones, meadows, uplands, &c. lying and being at Nolwotogg, on the west 


side of Quenecticut River, from the meadow on the south called Capawonk, formerly 
sold by Umpanchala to the inhabitants of Northampton, upon the great River of Quenecti- 
cut, northward to the upper side of Mincomunck, that is to say, the Brook or Riverett 
called Cappowong alias Mattaoolanick, which parts Cappowonganick and Wequetayyag, 
and the meadow and upland called Wequetayyag, and so northward to Yowanckhomuck 
and Natocouse, and the brook called Wunckcompss which comes out of the pond, and over 
the said Brook Nattacows or Wonckcompss still northward, viz. all the ground and meadow 
called Mincommuck to a marked Walnut tree, at the great River side, and so ofF from the 
River to a great White Oak marked, and thence to run out into the woods westward from 
the great River nine miles, and so down southward till it come to Coppowoung Riverett, 
which is to Northampton bounds, the aforesaid tract of ground called Wequetayyag, Yow- 
unckhommuck, Wonckcomss, Nattacows, Mincomuck, and from Quenecticott River 
to run westward nine miles into the woods both at the southward bounds up along the 
riverett Cappawoung, as well as the northward bounds of it; the said Umpanchala alias 
Womscom on the one party, for and in consideration of the sum of three hundred fathom 
of wompum in hand paid, besides several other small gifts, and for other good causes and 
considerations, do sell, give, grant, and have sold, given and granted, to John Pynchon, 
of Springfield, aforesaid, on the other party, and to his assigns and successors forever, and 
to their heirs, all and singular the aforesaid land, or by whatever other names it is or may 
be called, quietly to possess, have and enjoy the aforesaid tract of ground, free from all 
molestation or incumbrance of any Indians, and that forever; only the said Umpanchala 
doth reserve the Chickons alias Cottingyakies, which is to say, their planting ground, 
together with liberty to hunt deer or other wild creatures, to take fish, and to set wigwams 
on the commons, and take wood and trees for use; but otherwise all the premises and the 
whole tract of land before mentioned, with all the appurtenances and privileges thereof, 
the said John Pynchon, his assigns and successors and their heirs shall forever enjoy, ab- 
solutely and clearly, free from all molestation by any Indians; and further Umpanchala 
doth engage and covenant, and it is the intent of these presents that all the Indian corn- 
fields or old planted ground above Wequetayyag shall come to the English after his death, 
and then the Indians to have and enjoy only the old planted ground in Wequetayyag and 
down to the Brook Cappowongseate alias Mattoolanick. In witness hereof the said Um- 
panchala hath set to his hand and mark this tenth day of July, 1660. 

The mark — of Umpanchala. 

The mark — of Etowomq, brother to Umpanchala, own- 
ing and approving of the sale of the land, and is a 
witness to it. 
Subscribed in presence of 
John Russell, Jr. 
Andrew Bacon, 
Richard Church, 
Richard Montaeue, 
The mark— of Woassomehuc, alias Skejack, an Indian witness." 

The above said was here entered Dec. 25, 1678, 

Per me, Saml. Partrigg, Recorder. 

Oct. 28, 1663. John Pynchon assigned the above to the inhabitants of Hadley, because 
"it was purchased in the behalf of several persons who had obtained a grant from the Gen- 
eral Court of Massachusetts for a plantation, then intending to plant and settle themselves 
on the land," said Pynchon acting "only as being intrusted by the said persons now inhab- 
itants of Hadley." 

On the 17th of Jan. 1662, Umpanchala, with the consent of Etoomp, deeded to four men, 
for the town of Hadley, the planting ground in and above Wequetayag, reserved in the 
first deed, excepting five acres, which Hadley was to break up and fence for the Indians. 
The five acres, which were in Indian Hollow in Hatfield, were sold a few years after. The 
Indian planting ground, in the deed of 1660, is called "Chickons alias Cottingyakies." 
In the deed of 1662, it is named "Chickons Cottones Akers." Umpanchala was in debt 
to John Pynchon, who allowed him £ix, los. for this land, and received his pay of Hadley. 


Deed of Hockanum and part of South Hadley and Granby. 

This deed takes in the territory fi-om the mouth of Fort River, and Mount Holyoke on 
the north, to Stony brook, in South Hadley, on the south, extending easterly lo miles, or 
to three ponds. 

"Here followeth a copy of a deed of the purchase of certain tract or tracts of land by 
the Worshipful Maj. Pynchon of the Indians, and his assignment of the same to the inhab- 
itants of Hadley, and their successors, with his acknowledgment of the same. 

Be it known to all men by these presents, that Wequagon (formerly called Wulluthearne) 
and his wife Awonusk, and Squomp their son, being the sole and proper owners of the land 
at Nolwotogg, on the east side of Quenicticott River, from the brook Towonunkset and 
hill Petawamachu down southward towards Springfield bounds. We the said Wequagon, 
Awonunks and Squomp (for ourselves and heirs) on the one party, do give, grant, bargain 
and sell unto John Pynchon of Springfield, on the other party, to him, his heirs, assigns 
and successors forever, all the grounds, woods, trees, ponds, waters, stones, meadows, 
and uplands, &c. lying and being at Nolwotogg, on the east side of Quinecticott River 
from the hill called Petawamuchu, and the brook or little riverett called Towunuckset, 
which formerly Umpanchala and Wowwhillowa sold to the English, when they sold them 
Sunnuckquommuck and bounded it by the mouth of the brook Towunuckset and the hill 
Petowomachu. Now from the said hill and brook down Quinecticott River southward to 
a brook or riverett called Chusick, where the cart way goes over it, but at the mouth it is 
called Cowase, and all within the compass from the great river Quenicticott eastward into 
the woods about ten miles, viz. to the three ponds called Paquonckquamog, Scontocks, 
Paskisukquopoh. The aforesaid tract of land called Petowamuchu, Suchow, the great 
neck or meadow which the English call Hoccanum, together with the uplands adjoin- 
ing, and the brook or riverett called Cowachuck alias Quaquoonuntuck, at the mouth 
of it, and so south to the riverett Chusuck alias Cowase, at the mouth of it— and 
eastward to the three ponds before named. — We the said Weequagon, Awonusk and 
Squomp, do clearly and absolutely grant and sell to John Pynchon, of Springfield, 
aforesaid, and to his successors forever — And by these presents, for and in consideration 
of 150 fathom of wampom with ten coats, and more two yards of cloth over in the large- 
ness of their breeches, and several other small gifts, considerable all of them, and all in 
hand paid (the receipt whereof we do by these presents acknowledge) and for other good 
causes and considerations us thereunto moving, do grant and sell, and have sold, given, 
and granted to John Pynchon of Springfield, aforesaid, and to his assigns and successors, 
and their heirs forever, all and singular the aforenamed land from the north bounds Towu- 
nuckset to the south bounds Chusick alias Cowase, and from the west bounds the great 
river to the three ponds eastward called Paquonckequamog, Scontocks and Paskesicquopoh, 
or by whatever other names it is or may be called, quietly to possess, have and enjoy the 
aforesaid tract of ground, free from all molestation and incumbrance of any Indians, and 
that forever — only the said Weequogon and Awonuske his wife do reserve and exempt 
from this sale a parcel of land in the neck or Suchaw, called by the English Hoccanum, 
which parcel of land they say is upwards of fifty or sixty acres, being already mortgaged 
to Joseph Parsons of Northampton, and bounded out to him by stakes and marks in the 
presence of two Englishmen of Northampton, the which parcel of land being made over to 
Joseph Parsons they exempt from this sale but not otherwise, all the premises and the whole 
tract of land before mentioned, with all the profits, privileges and advantages and com- 
modities thereof, the said John Pynchon, his assigns and successors and their heirs shall 
forever enjoy, absolutely, clearly and free from all molestation by Indians against. We 
the said Wequogan, Awonunske and Squomp will defend and will unto the said Pynchon 
warrant the premises against all lawful claims whatsoever by any other except as before 
exempted— only the intent of these presents is not to exclude the Indians from hunting deer, 
beaver, or other wild creatures on the tract of land aforesold, which liberty they yet reserve 
to themselves — and also to take fish and sometimes to set their wigwams on the commons, 
and to take wood and trees off on the commons for their use. In witness whereof the afore- 
said Indians have hereunto set their hands and marks this 8th day of August, 1662. 

The mark — of Wequogon. 
The mark — of Awonunsk. 
The mark — of Squomp, 


Signed, subscribed and delivered in the presence of us, 

Pelatiah Glover, 

The mark — of Richard Sikes, 

John Lamb, 

James Taylor." 
John Pynchon's assignment to inhabitants of Hadley, Feb. 6, 1671. 

Indian chiefs were inclined to get into debt, and Wequagon (or Weackwagen) and his 
wife and son Squomp owed Joseph Parsons of Northampton, 80 beaver skins, for coats, 
wampum and goods; and on the 28th of May, 1662, they mortgaged to him a parcel of land 

in the meadow and upland by it, commonly called Hockanum, but by the Indians Peta , 

as security for the debt, and if the debt was not paid before the first of September, Parsons 
was to have the land. James Wright and Judah Wright of Northampton, were witnesses 
to the mortgage. This land, which was excepted from the sale in the preceding deed, was 
sold by Joseph Parsons to the inhabitants of Hadley, for a considerable sum which was 
paid, but through negligence, his quit-claim deed was not given until March 29, 1683. 
The land was then estimated at 60 or 70 acres. 

Deed of the North part of Hatfield and Whately, 

This tract of land was purchased by Hatfield, Oct. 19, 1672. It was bounded on the 
south by the land bought of Umpanchala, July 10, 1660, and on the north by Weekioan- 
nuck or Sugar Loaf brook, where the Pacomtuck path crossed it, the north line running 
thence east to the great river and west 6 miles into the woods. Part of the land abutted on 
the farms of Major Denison and Mr. Bradstreet eastward, and extended 6 miles west of 
them, and part abutted on the great river. This had been the land of Quanquan, (same 
as Quonquont) a sachem, and was sold by his widow Sarah Quanquan, his son Pocuno- 
house, Mattabauge, a squaw, Majesset, daughter of Quanquan, and Momecouse, for 50 
fathoms of wampumpeag. 

Deeds of Swampfield or Sunderland. 

On the loth of April, 1674, John Pynchon, acting in behalf of Robert Boltwood, Joseph 
Kellogg, John Hubbard, and Thomas Dickinson, of Hadley, and their associates, bought 
of several Indians, all the land from Nepesoaneag brook, (now Mohawk brook) next to 
Hadley bounds, up to the brook called Papacontuckquash, over against the mouth of Pa- 
comptuck (Deerfield) river, and six miles easterly from the Connecticut into the woods. 
Two deeds were given, one by Mishalisk, an old woman, the mother of Wuttawchincksin, 
deceased, who owed Pynchon; and one by Metawompe alias Nattawwassawett, for himself 
and in behalf of Wadanummin, Squiskeag and Sunkamachue, for 80 fathoms of wampum 
and some small things. The lands were in Sunderland, Montague and Leverett. The 
Indians belonged to the Norwottucks. Pynchon paid for the lands and the Hadley pur- 
chasers paid him and his son £26. 

Remarks on the Indian Deeds. 

The principal chiefs of the Norwottucks, north of Mount Tom 
and Mount Holyoke, were Chickwallop, Umpanchala and Quon- 
quont. They claimed to be the owners of most of the land on 
both sides of the river, Chickwallop of the southern, Umpanchala 
of the middle, and Quonquont of the northern part of the territory. 
Besides these, there were petty chiefs and owners of land at North- 
ampton, and at Sunderland. Awonusk seems to have been the 
daughter and heir of some deceased Norwottuck chief. Her 
husband, Wequogon, called also Wulluther, united with her in 
the deed of the land below Fort River, but he was a Springfield 
Indian and not a Norwottuck. 


It appears from the names of witnesses, that the deed of Had- 
ley was executed at Northampton; that of Hatfield at Hadley, and 
that of Hockanum and South Hadley at Springfield. It will be 
perceived that the orthography of Indian names is often changed 
in the same deed. This may have been partly the result of care- 
lessness, and some words may have been designedly varied. It 
was very difficult to express some of the Indian sounds by letters. 

The Indian names of some places may be ascertained from 
these deeds. They will be noticed elsewhere. Hockanum was 
an Indian name at East Hartford, but the Meadow near Mount 
Holyoke was so named by the English and not by the Indians. 
The English often gave the same Indian name to a stream and 
to the land adjoining it. The Indians may have done the same, 
or they may have varied the determination of the name, to dis- 
tinguish land from water. 

Indian signatures. — Indians, in signing deeds, commonly did 
something more than make a mark; most of them made a picture 
or representation of some object. In the old records at Spring- 
field, many of these Indian hieroglyphics may be seen, as a 
beaver, a snake, a snow-shoe, a bow, a hand, &c. Wequogon 
and Squomp both drew a rude picture of a hand, including the 
wrist, thumb and four fingers. Umpanchala made a bow and 
string. Chickwallop made a circular figure with a neck to it, 
intended for — I know not what. Awonusk manifested a different 
taste from the male chiefs; her sign looks like a strip of net-work, 
and was intended perhaps to represent a piece of wampum. 
Quonquont only made zigzag marks, like two or three of the letter 
W put together, and Umpanchala sometimes did the same. 

How Umpanchala received his pay for the lands in 

John Pynchon's account book has all the wampum and other 
articles, that he sold to Umpanchala, to pay him ']^£, or 300 
fathoms of wampum, for his land in Hatfield, including his fine 
of two fathoms for being drunk. Accounts with Indians were 
kept in fathoms and hands of wampum. Pynchon, in this account, 
estimated 10 hands equal to a fathom, making his hands more 
than 7 inches, instead of the usual hand of 4 inches. Wampum 
was an article of traffic, and also the money of the Indians, — the 
standard by which they measured the value of all other things. 
Pynchon valued the cheaper or white wampum, in 1660, at five 
shillings a fathom. A fathom of wampum was a string of beads 


made of shells, six feet in length. Pynchon wrote "fadam" for 

The following is copied from Pynchon's book, the items being 
a little compressed. The shag cotton of that day was made of 

"Umpanchala, the Indian Sachem and owner of the land at Norwotog, hath taken up 
of me towards pay for his land, which he promises to sell: — 

Fadams. hands. £ s. d. 



Sept. 23. 2 yards Bilboe rug, 




Red Shag Cotton and Trading Cloth, 




A shirt, 2f. A coat, 5f. 




I pair breeches. 





Feb. 13. Wampum now and in Sept. 






A coat, 5f. A gun, 6f. 5h. 






April 12 / Shag cotton and shag. 




to 1 6. \ 2 blue coats and i coat. 




A coat and a pair breeches. 










April 16. A shirt and shag cotton, 







" 25 to 27. Wampum, 





Red shag, 2f. jh. Coat, 







May 9 to / Wampum, 





June 7. \ 3 Coats, I5f. Waistcoat, 

, 2f. 






June 19. Wampum, 





I coat, 5f. Shag cotton. 








June 20 / Blue shag cotton, 
to July 10 \ 2 coats, shag and wampum. 

Had of Joseph Parsons, 
Coat and wampum at Parsons's, 
Payment to Mr. Goodwin, 
Red shag cotton and knife, 
July30to / Wampum and 2 coats, 
Aug. 23. \ "For your being drunk," 
Sept.6toi4 Wampum, 
A kettle. 


















In all 300 fadams at 5s. which make £75. So much I engaged to him for his land at 
Nalwotogg; and I have paid him all to his own content, in the particulars abovesaid. 
This account is set off with Hadley town, it being paid for the purchase of their land. 
September, 1660." 

Umpanchala expended all he received for the first sale of Hat- 
field in one year; and in three months more, from Sept. to Dec. 
1660, he bought of Pynchon goods to the amount of ;^I2, ids. 
and to pay this, sold the land to Hadley which he had reserved 


in the first deed. He had pledged this to Pynchon. Such want 
of foresight and calculation was characteristic of the Indians. 
A few chiefs seem to have sold all the lands and to have used the 

What Hadley paid for Lands. 

Pynchon charged the people of Hadley for the Hatfield lands 
only the amount that he paid to Umpanchala, ']^£, and ;;^ 
Compensation for his services must have been derived from a 
large profit on the goods and wampum sold. His account against 
Hadley follows: — 


£ s. 

1658. Dec. 25. To the purchase of the land on the east side of the river, 62 10 

1660. July 10. To the purchase of the land on the west side of the river, 75 o 

To law books, 1 10 

1660. Dec. To colors, stafl, tassels and top, 5 ° 

To second purchase on the west side, 12 10 

1662. Aug. 8. To the purchase of the neck which they call Hockanum, 50 o 

£206 10 

Pynchon received his pay of individuals, and not of the town, 
from 1661 to 1668. The account was balanced Nov. 12, 1669. 
He has credit for most if not all the settlers. The remark of 
Hadley men, on page 20, that they had purchased lands of the 
Indians at higher rates than other plantations in New England, 
seems to have been true. In addition, they paid to Mr. Brad- 
street 200;^ in money, and to Joseph Parsons not less than ^20. 
Their lands cost them 1400 dollars or more. 

This large sum was paid when wheat in Hadley was only 3s. 
and 3s. 3d. per bushel; and in money not above 2s. 6d. Who- 
ever takes into consideration all the circumstances, will come to 
the conclusion that the people of Hadley paid for the land which 
they cultivated, a much higher price than those now pay who buy 
good land of the U. S. government at $1.25 per acre. The people 
in the towns on the river had war with the Indians about half the 
time, for 50 years after 1674. 

Pynchon paid from his shop, in wampum and merchandise, for 
almost all the lands near the river, that were purchased of the 
Indians, from Suflrteld and Enfield, to Deerfield and Northfield, 
and received his pay from the settlers and proprietors of the new 
towns, to whom he assigned the Indian deeds. Only a small 
part of the assignments of the three Hadley deeds are given on 
pages 107, 108 and no. 

114 history of hadley 

Indian name of Norwottuck Valley. 

In Eliot's Indian Bible, the word for "the midst" of any thing, 
is usually noeu or noau, (sometimes nashaue,) and tuk at the end of 
a word generally signifies a river or brook. In our English 
version, the words, "the city that is in the midst of the river," 
are found in Joshua 13, verses g and 16; and in Eliot, in both 
verses, "the midst of the river" is rendered by noautuk. This is 
the Indian name of our valley. The peninsulas and projecting 
points of land at Hadley, Hockanum, Northampton and Hatfield, 
were "in the midst of the river." This Indian word was varied 
in different dialects, and in the records of the English. Some 
tribes did not pronounce / and r, and these letters are not in Eliot's 
Bible, The Nipmucks pronounced /, and some Indians on Con- 
necticut River, below Massachusetts, had the sound of r. The 
following variations of the name of this valley, are taken from 
the records of Connecticut, Massachusetts, the United Colonies 
and Hampshire towns, and from the writings of the Pynchons. 

Nawattocke, 1637, Nowottok and Nawottock, 1646, Nau- 
wotak, 1648, Noatucke, 1654, Nanotuck, 1653, Nonotucke, 1653, 
1655, 1658, Norwotake, 1657, Norwootuck and Norwuttuck, 
1657, Northwottock, 1656, 1661, Norwottock, 1659, 1660, Nor- 
woottucke, 1659, Norwotuck, 1661. John Pynchon has in his 
accounts Nalwotogg, Nolwotogg and Norwotog, and in his deeds 
Nolwotogg. The latter spelling was probably according to the 
pronunciation of the Nipmucks, who lived here. Nonotuck was 
used when there was no town but Northampton. The Hadley 
settlers introduced from Hartford, Norwottuck, and that name was 
more used by the English than the others. 


Indians near Connecticut River — The Norwottucks and their Forts — The Mohawks and 
their cruelty and cannibaHsm — The Mohawks in Hampshire county — -Talks at Albany 
— Presents to the Mohawks — Entertainment of Indians — Wampum, or the money of 
the Indians. 

From 1636, when Springfield was settled, until the Indian war 
of 1675, the Nipmucks or Nipnets inhabited the interior of 
Massachusetts, occupying many places in the present county of 
Worcester, and in the old county of Hampshire, and some dwelt 
in Connecticut, south of Worcester county. They were not 
subject to a common sachem, but had many petty chiefs, and 
some were partially under the dominion of tribes not Nipmucks. 
There were four small tribes or clans upon Connecticut River, 


or a few miles from it, viz., the Agawams at Springfield and 
West Springfield, the Waranokes at Westfield, the Nonotucks or 
Norwottucks at Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield, and the 
Pocomtucks at Deerfield. Those who established themselves at 
Northfield for a time, may have been Pocomtucks. It is not 
known that there were any permanent Indian settlements above 
Northfield, nor upon the Housatonnuc River within the limits of 
Massachusetts, in the 17th century. There is some reason to 
suppose that a part of the Indians at Waranoke came originally 
from Hudson's River, and returned to that river in Philip's war. 
The Quabaugs at Brookfield were in Hampshire county. Few 
if any Indians resided constantly in the territory now in Suffield and 

The four tribes of western Nipmucks near Connecticut River 
and its branches, may be reckoned at ten or eleven hundred when 
most numerous. Their numbers were considerably reduced be- 
fore they left this part of the country, and did not perhaps exceed 
eight hundred in 1675, and they were some hundreds less 
when the war ended. The Norwottucks may have been the 
most numerous clan; the Pocomtucks were the most energetic 
and manly. 

The numbers of barbarous tribes and nations are almost 
always over-rated. There has been not a little exaggeration in 
regard to the Indian population of New England. Trumbull 
over-estimates the Connecticut Indians, and errs exceedingly in 
regard to those of Windsor. Misled by "manuscripts from 
Windsor," he supposes that about the year 1670, there were 2000 
Indian bowmen in that town, and 19 Indians to one Englishman! 
Such accounts require no refutation. In 1680, the government 
of Connecticut received some official inquiries from England, 
one of which related to the number of Indian warriors in the col- 
ony; to this they replied, "as for Indian neighbors, we compute 
them 500 fighting men." This computation seems to include 
only the Indians in or near townships settled by the English, but 
it exhibits the great decrease of the Indians. From other docu- 
ments, it might be inferred that the Indians in all the Connecticut 
River towns in the colony, with Farmington and Simsbury, did 
not exceed 1200 in 1680.* 

*The Indians in the river towns were not destroyed by war, but they diminished so 
fast, that at the end of every 40 years, they were only about one-half as many as at the 
beginning. At this rate, only one-eighth of the number in 1640 would remain in 1760. 

"The Indian disappears before the white man simply because he will not work." — 


The first naming of the Norwottucks in pubHc records was by 
the General Court of Connecticut in 1637. They were noticed 
in the records of the United Colonies in 1646, and Chickwallop 
was named for the first time. William Pynchon mentioned the 
Norwottucks and Chickwallop in 1648. For some years, the 
Norwottucks, Pocomtucks and others were at war with Uncas and 
the Mohegans. Uncas or his brother assailed these river Indians 
in 1656. In 1657, they and others made an incursion into Con- 
necticut against Uncas and his Indians. The Pocomtucks were 
conspicuous in this war with Uncas, and when the United Colo- 
nies sent messengers to them in 1659, requesting them to suspend 
hostilities, the sachems declined to make peace, and replied to 
the messengers with moderation, shrewdness and firmness. About 
1663, these river Indians with many others commenced a war with 
the Mohawks, and were defeated. Peace was made in 1671. 

The Norwottuck chiefs could sell lands, but had little authority 
over the Indians, and were of little importance. The historians 
and novelists will not be able to make heroes of any of the river 
sachems, from Saybrook to Northfield. The Indians in this 
valley at times had no acknowledged sachem, and in 1668, they 
agreed that Chickwallop should be their chief, three men having 
been appointed by the General Court, at the request of the Hamp- 
shire deputies, to treat with them. There was nothing in Chick- 
wallop to inspire the English or Indians with respect. He did 
not live many years after 1668. 

The Norwottucks committed no great offences. They some- 
times harbored evil-doers from other tribes. Some were inclined 
to petty thefts. When they could get strong drink, they became 
drunk, and brawls and tumults ensued, and they would insult 
and abuse the constable and others. When free from liquor, 
they were generally peaceful and respectful towards the whites, 
who intended to treat them justly and humanely.* 

The last chief men of the Noi^wottucks. — In 1672, Petomanch 
committed divers thefts in Northampton and Hadley and fled to 
Quabaug; he came back to the "Indians' fort in Northampton," 
and when an attempt was made to take him, Wuttawan helped 
him to escape. Some of the principal men of the tribe then 
came forward, and agreed to deliver up Petomanch or Wuttawan, 
or otherwise make satisfaction, as the court should order. Their 
names were Wahinunco, Wadnummin, Massoamat, Wawwar- 

*It is a hard and difficult matter, for those who are conscious and proud of their supe- 
riority, to treat inferiors with justice and humanity. Even good men are very deficient 
in this respect. The apostolic injunction to "honor all men," is not much regarded. 


ranckshan, Sunckamachue, Wuchuwin, Mummuncott, Rollo, 
and blind James. The last two had names given by the Enghsh. 
Some of these nine Indians may be considered the last of the Nor- 
wottuck leaders, while they remained in their native land. Two 
of them sold land in Sunderland in 1674, viz., Wadnummin and 
Sunckamachue. In August, 1675, they and the tribe fled from 
their fort and became enemies. In the winter of 1675-6, these 
Indians were towards Albany, and were called Hadley Indians, 
and Sancumacha, (same as Sunckamachue,) was their sachem. 
In this war and after, they were denominated Hadley Indians, 
and Northampton and Hadley Indians; and in Connecticut, they 
were often called Norwottucks. 

The Indians' means of subsistence. — There is no intimation that 
the Indians in this valley and others in the vicinity lacked food, 
or that their supplies had been perceptibly diminished previous 
to their departure. The forests in every direction remained 
nearly as extensive as ever, and wild animals, fish and wild fruits 
were still abundant. The whites sometimes hunted and fowled, 
but they were too industrious to spend much time in such pur- 
suits. There was land enough for corn, but without fences it 
was useless, and the women took meadow land upon shares, which 
the English plowed. The squaws planted, hoed, picked and 
husked the corn, their lazy husbands disdaining such labor.* In 
Connecticut, the Indians divided the corn on the land, after it 
was husked, and had half of it. It may be inferred that the crop 
was divided in the same manner at Norwottuck. There is noth- 
ing to show that the subsistence of the Indians from the land was 
materially lessened. 

The first settlers of Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield lived 
in peace with the Indians until Philip's war in 1675. There was 
frequent intercourse between them, the Indians often coming 
into the villages for traffic and other purposes, and the salutation 
of netop, (my friend,) was often heard in the streets. Indian 
men, women, young men, maids and small children, in their 
scanty dresses, were every-day sights, and excited no curiosity. 
The men sold furs and venison, and the women made and sold 
baskets and mats and other things. Among these laborious 
Indian women, were some that were mild and kind-hearted. The 
western Nipmucks continued to be pagans. 

♦"Extremes meet." The ignorant savage and those who think themselves the most 
highly civilized, viz., many of those in fashionable high life, harmonize in many things. 
Both contemn and scorn useful labor, and consider those engaged in toilsome occupations 
as mean and despicable; both delight in gaming, chasing animals and carousing. 


NoRwoTTucK Forts. 

The Indians of the Norwottuck valley had several forts, erected 
to protect themselves against the attacks of their enemies. Van- 
derdonck, the Dutch writer, says the Indians build their castles in 
places difficult of access, on or near the crown of a hill; the wall is 
made of palisades set in the ground and within are their wigwams. 
The forts of the Norwottuck Indians seem to have been generally 
built upon the top of a bluff or high bank, projecting into a valley 
or interval, near a stream. In Northampton, there were at least 
three forts in such places; they were probably successive and not 
cotemporaneous. One was near the north-east end of Fort Hill, 
overlooking the meadow; one was on Fort Plain, now in East- 
hampton, above the high bank near the Manhan; and the third 
was on another Fort Plain, about halfway to Hatfield, on the top 
of the high, bank of the Connecticut, opposite the north-west 
corner of Hadley Great Meadow. In Hadley, Indian bones have 
been found on several projecting points or ridges. One place 
was near the north-west angle of Fort Meadow, on a corner of 
upland long since washed away. Another was on Spruce Hill, 
near the southern extremity, which projects into Port River 
valley, and is now covered with light sand. There was an im- 
portant fort on the western side of Lawrence's Plain, on the top 
of the high steep bank which is the eastern boundary of Fort 
Meadow Skirts and Fort River valley. The river and meadow 
were named from this fort. In 1684, Timothy Nash had a grant 
of two acres of land, "where the old fort stood" above the bank, 
adjoining his land in the Skirts below. These two acres and the 
site of the old fort can be easily identified. The old common 
fence from Connecticut River, on the north side of Fort Meadow, 
came up the steep bank, just north of the fort, continued easterly 
some distance, and then turned southerly towards Mount Holyoke, 
embracing the ground on which the fort stood. This ground had 
the almost perpendicular bank, rising 40 or 50 feet above Fort 
River, on the south and west sides, and the river flowed at the 
bottom of this bank on the west side. Lawrence's Plain, a high, 
pleasant tract of land, extended easterly. 

From this fort, or from openings near it, the Indians had fine 
views of meadows and uplands; and some of the new village at 
Northampton was visible. The fort was about 140 rods east of 
the Connecticut. I visited this place in 1846; the brow of the 
bank was covered with trees; grass, johnswort, thistles and a few 
small buttonwoods grew upon the site of the fort, and cows were 



quietly ruminating in the shade of the trees. All was silent and 
desolate, where in former days the Indians danced and powowed, 
and indulged in noisy merriment and boisterous revelry. 

Common Fence. 


High bank. 

This is an imperfect representation. 
The shape of the fort is conjectural. The 
outlines of the top of the bank are irregular. 
Those in the fort got water from the river 
below the bank. The cows now (1846) 
have a path down the bank a little south 
of the fort place. 

North of the village of North Hadley, on a ridge that separates 
the eastern and western School Meadows, was another residence 
of the Indians, supposed to have been that of Quonquont. More 
bones have been found here than in any other place in Hadley. 
The ridge becomes wider near the north end, where it approaches 
the Connecticut, and this broad part may contain an acre. This 
was probably the seat of the fort or village. The Connecticut 
flows along the base of the hill, on the north-east and north, and 
the hill is partially protected from its ravages by rocks and sand- 
stone. This is a pleasant place with a goodly prospect, and must 
have been so when the Indians occupied it. 

River. This plan with straight lines is very defective. 

The general course of the river is southerly, but 
for some distance against the upper and lower 
School Meadow, it is westerly. The triangle is 
River, the supposed site of Quonquont 's fort. The rocks 
are near the north-east corner of the triangle. The 
brook Wunnaquickset, of the Hadley deed, is 
Upper S. M. above this ridge, and crosses the Upper School 

Some have admired the taste of the Indians as exhibited in the 
picturesque situations which they chose for forts and villages. 
There is not much foundation for this admiration. The tribes 
were pugnacious, and it was owing to their wars that they selected 
elevated places for villages, where they could more easily secure 
and defend themselves, and more readily discern the approach 
of an enemy. 

The last fortified residence of our Indians in the land of their 
fathers, was in the place before referred to, between Northamp- 
ton and Hatfield, on a high bank west of the Connecticut, not far 
from the mouth of Half-way brook, and so near the river, that 
men could speak with the Indians in the fort, from the Hadley 
side of the river. This high plain, formerly called Fort Plain, is 
now crossed by the railroad, many feet below the surface. There 


was no fort in Hadley for some years before 1675. The Indians 
did not all live in forts, and when they feared the Mohawks or 
other enemies, many sought refuge near the houses and in the 
out-buildings of the English, and their living among them was 
very troublesome. 

Hubbard says the fort from which the Indians fled in 1675 was 
within a mile of Hatfield, but it must have been about two miles 
from the main street in Hatfield. The records do not allude to 
any fort in Hatfield in 1675, or before, though Umpanchala doubt- 
less had a fort on the high bank of Capawonk or elsewhere on his 
land, when he sold it in 1660. 

The Mohawks or Maquas. 

The "Five Nations," so called, were the Mohawks, Oneidas, 
Onondagas, Cayugas and Senecas. The name Mohawks was 
often extended to all those confederate nations. They were 
brave, fierce and ferocious, and carried on an exterminating war- 
fare more than a century after 1600, making a perfect desert of 
the country for 500 miles, west and south, and destroying more 
Indians than have been destroyed by Europeans in war since the 
country was settled. They were the worst of conquerors, and 
seemed to conquer to gratify their thirst for blood.* — The Mo- 
hawk tribe lived about 40 miles west of Albany. 

They were extremely filthy, never washing face nor hands, and 
they cooked fish from the water, and the entrails of deer, without 
any cleansing.f 

Cannibalism of the Mohawks. — The early Dutch and New 
England writers affirmed truly that the Mohawks were cannibals 
or man-eaters. A writer! in 1644, says they tortured their cap- 
tives, and then roasted them before a slow fire and ate them. They 
were cannibals half a century later. In February, 1693, Col. 
Schuyler at the head of whites and Mohawks pursued a party of 
French and Indians and killed many Frenchmen, and the bodies 
of 27 were found. A letter from S. Van Cortland in New York, 
to Connecticut, dated March 2, 1693, says: — "Our Indians did 
quickly eat up the bodies of the 27 Frenchmen, after their natural 
barbarity, and have brought the scalps to Albany." Governor 
Fletcher of New York wrote to Connecticut, March 11, 1693: — 

♦Gallatin's "Synopsis of the Indian Tribes of North America." 

•j-From Megapolensis, a Dutch minister at Albany, 1644. 

All savages are filthy. The New England Indians were not cleanly. By an agreement 
made with sachems at Concord in 1646, the Indians were not "to pick lice as formerly 
and eat them." 



"Our Indians found 27 bodies of the enemy, whom (after their 
crowns taken off,) they most barbarously roasted and ate."* 
CannibaHsm was not however the worst part of the Mohawk 

War between the Mohawks and New England Indians.— 
About 1663, war was commenced between the Mohawks and the 
New England Indians, and in the summer of 1669, the latter 
united their forces, entered the Mohawk country and besieged 
the nearest Mohawk fort. In a few days they retreated, were 
attacked on their retreat, and more than 50 slain. They came 
home much ashamed, and retired under the shelter of the English. 
Sancumacha, a Norwottuck, is said to have been a captain in 
this expedition. During the war, the Mohawks, in small parties, 
made incursions into New England. Peace was made in 1671. 

The Mohawks in Hampshire county. — In the summer of 1667, 
a number of hogs and some cattle belonging to Hadley, North- 
ampton and Springfield, were killed in the woods. The inhabit- 
ants were satisfied that some of them were killed by the Mohawks, 
and they were suspicious of some Kennebec Indians who had been 
this way, and even of the Norwottucks. The Mohawks shot and 
scalped an Indian servant of Nathaniel Clark, of Northampton, 
Aug. 28, 1667. 

In October, 1667, the deputies of Hampshire complained to the 
General Court of the injuries done by the Mohawks and other 
Indians. A committee recommended that a letter be written to 
the Mohawks demanding satisfaction for the damages, &c. The 
General Court, Oct. 31, wrote a long letter to the chief sachem of 
the Mohawks, and a short one to the Kennebec sachem. The 
former follows from the records — not retaining the old orthog- 

To the chief Sachem of the Mohawks: 
The General Court of Massachusetts, upon complaint made to them by some of their 
people of Hadley and Northampton, that they have suffered much damage this last summer 
by the Mohawks, have thought meet to signify the same unto you and to let you know 
that about mid-summer last, some of our Englishmen saw some of your people, whom they 
had speech with, going with burdens from their fires and place of lodging, where several 
hog's feet, new and bloody, were left behind, viz., i6 feet of swine; Also others of ours 
have taken up shoes made of green hogskins, which were left at the places where the Mo- 
hawks made their stands, and from whence they were seen to go; and about the same time, 
we had several cattle shot and wounded, and some killed, and the flesh cut off from their 
bones and carried away; many Mohawks being then about our towns and seen by some 
English, we have cause to suspect that this also was done by some of them, (not to speak 
of the damage your people formerly, some years past, did in gathering, carrying away and 

♦Archives of Connecticut. 

•j-There were rare instances of cannibalism in New England. In 1637, Uncas and iiis 
men made a horrid repast upon the body of a Pequot at Saybrook. 


spoiling our corn.) Their killing of our swine as aforesaid being very evident, we have 
reason to move for speedy and full satisfaction, which our people expect, and we hope you 
will cause to he made them accordingly. We have further to let you know that an Indian 
youth who was servant to an Englishman at Northampton, was murthered about the end 
of August last, close by the town, and part of his hair flayed off his head,* on which day 
some Mohawks were seen nigh the very place where he was killed, and we have heard that 
not long after this time the Mohawks showed a lock of hair at Albany, which was short 
hair as this youth's was; so that we have probable grounds to think that some of your 
people are guilty of this murder, which yet we are apt to think may not only be unknown 
to you, but contrary to your order, and do presume you will not allow any such thing; 
and therefore do acquaint you therewith, desiring you would take some special course for 
redress of these insolencies and prevention of like evils for future, lest your people, if they 
go on in such ways, should occasion a breach of the peace betwixt you and us. We must 
also tell you that these actings are expressly against the promise of those of your nation, 
which we once had in our hands,-}- whom we secured from any violence by our Indians 
and sent them home with manifestation of love and friendship, and willingness for the con- 
tinuance thereof, who told us that your people would not meddle with any Indians that 
wore English clotlies, or that had their hair cut short. But this aforementioned action, 
as it gives us cause to suspect your people, so also to let you know we do not judge it con- 
venient for you to suffer your people in an hostile manner to approach nigh us or our Indians 
that are dwelling amongst our towns, which we desire you so to take notice of and consider 
as not to disturb our peace by any unlawful attempts of your men, but to cause them to 
shun and avoid all just offence and prejudice to us which may provoke our people against 
you. We never yet did any wrong to you or any of yours, neither will we take any from 
you, but shall right our people according to justice; yet are we desirous to continue all 
amicable correspondence with you, if the fault be not in yourselves by offering insolencies 
to our people, which we may not bear or suffer. Thus hoping of your readiness to make 
satisfaction for what is past, and care for your future continuance of friendship, your loving 

The Governor and General Court of the Massachusetts. 

This letter had some effect. It was undoubtedly interpreted 
by men at Albany, and as the Mohawks desired to be on good 
terms with New England, they made some reparation. The 
records of the county court in March, 1669, mentioned that about 
20 pounds had been received from the "Magnaws." It was sent 
to Milford, but was then in the hands of Simon Lobdell of Spring- 
field, in leather. The court ordered that Springfield should have 
5;^ for those who had lost swine and cattle; Northampton, "]£, of 
which, half was for Nathaniel Clark's Indian servant killed; and 
Hadley, 8;^, for those who had been damaged. Hadley had lost 
more cattle and hogs than any other town. Lobdell was to pay 
in shoes at fair prices. 

In Philip's war, in 1676, Massachusetts and Connecticut tried 
to engage the Mohawks against the Indians of New England. 
Governor Andros of New York, in letters to Connecticut, pre- 
tended that the Mohawks had done "great execution on your 

♦Scalping was evidently something new to the English. 

•|-In September, 1665, five Mohawks or Maquas came into Cambridge well armed. 
They were arrested and imprisoned at Boston. The English had never seen any Mohawks 
before, and they attracted much attention. The Indians flocked into Boston, and wished 
to put them to death. The Court dismissed them with a letter to their sachems, and a 
convov of liorse to conduct them clear of our Indians. A copy of the letter is extant. 


Indian enemies" and trusted Connecticut would be mindful of 
their service. Connecticut, in reply, Aug. 31st, 1676, professed 
to be in the dark about these services, and said they could not be 
mindful of them, until they knew what they had done. Gov. A. 
did not enlighten them. These Indians had performed no im- 
portant services. This was the first attempt to draw presents 
from New England for the Mohawks. 

In the spring of 1677, Massachusetts desired to make a friendly 
league with the Mohawks, and very unwisely sought their aid 
against the Indians in Maine. Obtaining the concurrence of 
Connecticut, John Pynchon of Springfield and James Richards 
of Hartford, were sent to Albany. They treated with the Indians, 
and gave them presents of wampumpeag, duffels, powder and 
shot. The Indians gave three belts of wampum, boasted of 
what they had done for New England, and gave assurance of 
their endeavors against the Indians at Kennebec. New England 
was deceived by the pretensions and promises of the Mohawks. 

The Indians did not regard their engagement, and instead of 
proceeding to Maine, they came down upon the peaceable, pray- 
ing Indians of Massachusetts, in September, 1677, and again in 
June, 1678, and killed some and made captives of others.* They 
brought two squaws through Hadley, and the people of that 
place tried to redeem them, but the Mohawks would not let them 
go. They returned evasive answers to those sent to Albany to 
demand the release of the captives. 

In November, 1680, John Pynchon was again sent to Albany. 
He charged the Mohawks with injuring our friendly Indians, and 
not delivering up those taken; with killing swine and cattle of the 
English, in the summer of 1680, robbing some houses, and march- 
ing through villages in a hostile posture. He said such things 
must be stopped. He presented his gift of duffels, shirts, blankets, 
wampum, rum, tobacco, &c., amounting to near 90 pounds or 
300 dollars.— The Mohawks said he had spoken many hard things, 
but they were sweetened by the present. They made an artful, 
dishonest reply, and declined to give up the Christian Indians. 

In October, 1683, the Mohawks sent a presentf of 20 beaver skins 
to Massachusetts; and the colony sent in return a much more valu- 
able present, in wampum, shirts, duffels, stockings, rum and tobacco. 

♦Belknap says the Mohawks did not attack the hostile Indians in New Hampshire, 
but the friendly ones; and the scheme of engaging them in our quarrel was a source of 
many calamities. 

■j-The expression, "an Indian gift" was a by-word in New England, denoting a present 
made by a person who expected five or ten times as much value in return. 


After the war between England and France and between their 
colonies in America, commenced in 1689, it was an object of 
great importance to please the Five Nations and keep them faith- 
ful to England and her colonies. As New York was a feeble 
colony, Massachusetts and Connecticut deemed it necessary to 
contribute largely for this purpose. 

In 1689, three Agents from Massachusetts and one from Con- 
necticut were sent to Albany. They left Westfield, Aug. 27, 
escorted by 10 troopers, and were gone more than four weeks. 
They gave large presents to the Maquas, small presents to the 
river Indians, gifts to the sachems privately, and feasted 100 of 
their people. All expenses were '^2']£. Great Britain and New 
York also gave presents to the Five Nations. Robert Livingston, 
who resided in or near Albany, in a letter dated July 2, 1691, 
"wished that we needed not to court such heathen as the Maquas 
for assistance, for they are a broken reed to depend upon." 

The Mohawks or Maquas were the allies of Great Britain, 
New England, and the other English colonies. Sensible that they 
were of some importance, they were sometimes insolent and in- 
jurious in houses, in these river towns, and farther east. The 
people generally submitted to these things; it would not do to 
quarrel with the Mohawks. 

Entertainment of Indians. — Parties of Indian chiefs often came 
to Boston whose principal object was to obtain presents, and to 
feast and carouse at the expense of Massachusetts. In 1723, 
Aug. 21, 63 New York Indians, chiefly Mohawks, came to Boston, 
"with sham proposals of alliance against the Eastern Indians, 
but their real object was only to receive presents."* They were 
treated with much respect, were received by the General Court and 
feasted at the castle. They were entertained in Boston four 
weeks, and furnished profusely with the best of food and liquors, 
and received rich presents to a large amount. The whole expense 
to the colony was above 1000 pounds. Luke Smith of Hadley 
had a bill for entertaining some of these Mohawks. They re- 
turned to Albany, and eventually denied what they had promised 
at Boston. 

Other Indians who had been enemies, as the French Mohawks 
in Canada who had been converted by the Jesuits,t and the Penob- 
scots and other eastern Indians, came to Boston in time of 
peace and made fair promises, and feasted at the colony's expense 

*Dr. Douglas says this. 

+One great object of their conversion was political influence. The converted Indians, so 
called, became friendly to the French and ready to fight against the English and other heretics. 


and received presents, but joined the French as soon as war 
commenced. It was difficult to restrict any of these Indians; 
they must have what they desired. They had a great abundance 
of beef and other meats, rum, wine, cider, beer, pipes and tobacco, 
and indulged in drunken revels. In 1733, John Sale charged 
the colony 195 pounds for keeping 22 French Mohawks 19 days, 
including a feast at the castle. He charged for their breaking 
windows, tables, chairs, knives, mugs, cups and glasses, and for 
daubing the walls, tables and chairs. They had in 19 days, 48 
dozen pipes and 39 dozen of tobacco. In 1736, John Sale enter- 
tained nine Penobscot chiefs 24 days, and charged the colony 145 
pounds. In his bill, he says they ate between 50 and 60 pounds 
of the best of meat daily, (six pounds to a man,) and each had 
daily one pint and a half of wine and a shilling's worth of rum, 
and in all they had 120 gallons of cider and two gross of pipes 
with tobacco. They were taken down to the castle and treated. 
He had charges for their breaking furniture, and for "washing 
49 of their greasy shirts," and his charge for "cleansing and 
whitewashing two rooms after them" was 60 shillings. It was 
no easy matter to cleanse a room that had been occupied by these 
dirty bacchanals. 

There were similar scenes and transactions, in other colonies, 
when Indians assembled to make or renew treaties. 

"The European governments encouraged the natural propensities of the Indians. Both 
France and England courted a disgraceful alliance with savages, and both armed them 
against the defenceless inhabitants of the other party." — Gallatin. 

Wampum, or the Money of the Indians. 
Wampum, used by the Indians for money and ornament, was 
first brought to Plymouth in New England in 1627. In 1643, 
when Roger Williams wrote, wampum or wampumpeag or white 
money, and suckanhock, or black or blue money, were so plenty 
that the English, French and Dutch bought with them, furs and 
other things of the Indians, for 600 miles north and south from 
New England. This Indian money, which was in the shape of 
beads, was made of sea shells, by the Indians of Long Island, and 
afterwards by those of Block Island, and others. Six of the white 
beads, or three of the black ones, including blue and purple, 
passed for a penny, and a fathom or six feet of the white shell 
beads were worth five shillings. The black beads were of double 
the value of the white. The English used the words white wam- 
pum, and black wampum, but as wampum was the Indian word 
for white, these expressions sounded strangely to the Indians. 
The wampumpeag or white beads were much more plenty than 


the black ones. When the price of the white beads was 6 for a 
penny, and 5s. for a string of 6 feet, the number of beads was 360 
in a fathom, and 5 in an inch. These prices continued nominally 
many years, but the supply exceeded the demand; the value be- 
came less and less, and white beads fell to 8, 12, and 16 for a 
penny, anS in 1675, some were sold for money at 24 for a penny. 
The price of the black beads fell answerably. Massachusetts 
ordered, in 1650, that wampumpeag should pass for debts to 
the value of 40 shillings, the white at 8 and the black at 4 for a 
penny, except for country rates. This law was repealed in 166 1, 
and wampum had no legal price. 

Silver coins were scarce, and the people found wampum very 
convenient, and much of it was used in the Hampshire towns, 
and in other parts of New England. It was frequently used to 
balance the accounts of traders, and it was often paid at the ferries 
and inns. Many men when they paid a tavern bill on a journey, 
did not take out a purse of coins, but strings of wampum and 
loose beads. Inn-keepers and ferrymen received much wampum, 
and they complained of losses, for large quantities could not be 
disposed of as they received it. 

William Pynchon, and afterwards his son John Pynchon, were 
extensively engaged in trade with the Indians and whites, and 
they dealt more largely in wampum than any others on Connecti- 
cut River, above or below Springfield. They purchased some 
bushels of loose shell beads at a time, whether by weight, or 
measure, is not known; and employed the women and children 
of Springfield to string them at their dwellings, at three halfpence 
per fathom of 6 feet. Near 20,000 fathoms were strung in Spring- 
field at this rate. One kind of wampum was called scosue. 
John Pynchon sold to those whom he had licensed to trade with 
the Indians, wampum to the amount of 20, 50, 100, and even 125;^ 
at a time, and he received great quantities in payment for goods. 
Wampum continued to depreciate, and in 1675, a fathom of 
white beads was worth only is. 3d. in money, and the English 
did not deal so much in them. 

The Pynchons' accounts with Indians were always kept in 
fathoms and hands, or in fathoms, hands and pence; never in 
shillings and pence. They made use of compound addition and 
subtraction that are not found in arithmetics. 

The Indians made of shell beads and threads, belts, girdles, 
scarfs, head-bands, bracelets, necklaces, pendants for the ears; 
and some made rich caps, aprons, &c. of these beads. A rich 
girdle required about 2300 beads. 



The Indian War of 1675 and 1676* — Erroneous notions about Philip — Importance of 
the Nipmucks — Destruction of Brookfield — Mr. Stoddard's account of the attempt 
to disarm the Norwottucks, and of their escape — Fight above Hatfield — Deerfield 
burnt — Men slain at Northfield — Capt. Beers and his party cut off at Northfield— 
Northfield deserted — Attack upon Hadley repelled by the aid of Gen. Goffe — Capt. 
Lathrop and his company slain at Bloody Brook — Deerfield abandoned — Burning of 
Springfield — Attack on Hatfield. 

This war is commonly denominated "Philip's War," from the 
English name of the sachem of the Wampanoags or Pokanokets, 
who commenced it. His chief seat was called Mount Hope by 
the English, and is now within the town of Bristol, R. L In this 
war, the people of Massachusetts, and of some of the adjoining 
colonies, first experienced the devastation and barbarity which 
distinguish Indian warfare. 

Our ancestors viewed Philip as the master spirit, who influenced 
the councils and conduct of other tribes, and contrived and directed 
most of the attacks, slaughters and desolations of the war. They 
represented him as a malignant demon, bent on the blackest deeds. 
Some of their descendants are inclined to view him as "a great 
warrior, a penetrating statesman, and a mighty prince." Neither 
the old nor the recent writers seem to have formed a just esti- 
mate of his character. Philip, in great qualities, did not surpass 
many other sachems in New England and other colonies. Indeed, 
some Nipmuck sagamores seem to have been as enterprising and 
eflScient actors in this bloody and desolating war, as Philip him.- 
self. The great foresight, profound schemes, and unbounded 
influence attributed to him are to a great extent imaginary. He 
was no more inhuman and cruel than other Indians. 

Philip was not able to combine against the English in 1675 
more than 850 or 900 fighting men,f nor so many at one time; 
these men, and the women and children connected with them, 
may have numbered 3500.I More than half were Nipmucks, 
some of whom were subject to Philip. He did not persuade a 
single tribe in Connecticut, Rhode Island, or New Hampshire, to 
unite with him, though Indians from those colonies may have 
aided him. The Indians in Plymouth Colony were more numer- 
ous than in Massachusetts, and many owed some kind of alle- 
giance to Philip, yet not many were willing to engage in his quarrel. 

*Most of the account of this war was prepared in 1847. 

"("The war in Maine which commenced in Sept. 1675, ^^^ ^ different origin. 

JThe Indians in New England exclusive of Maine, in 1675, ^^7 have been 21,000, 


The Indians in Massachusetts and New Hampshire in 1674 
did not exceed 4400. Gookin,* in 1674, estimated the Paw- 
tuckets in New Hampshire and Massachusetts at 250 men, and 
the Massachusetts nation at 300 men. Reckoning every fourth 
person, a man or warrior, the whole number of these two nations 
would be 2200. The Nipmucks or Nipnets may have been 
about 2200 more, and their fighting men, 550. BayHesf esti- 
mated the Nipmucks at 1000 and Felt| at 2400. Some of these 
were praying Indians who did not unite in the war. About one- 
third of the Nipmucks were in the vicinity of Connecticut River. 

Not many of the Pawtucket and Massachusetts nations joined 
in the war. The hostile Indians in 1675 were mostly Nipmucks. 
Philip's Wampanoags and others that aided him in Plymouth 
Colony may have been 250 fighting men. But after he left the 
Pocasset swamp, Aug. i, 1675, and fled towards the Nipmuck 
country, many of his men withdrew from him, and the squaw- 
sachem of Pocasset and her men drew off" to the Narragansetts. 
Gookin had been "certainly informed that he had little above 
fifty men left, but hundreds of old men, women, and children. "§ 

It may be supposed that some Indians from Plymouth Colony, 
and from tribes elsewhere, joined Philip after he came to Hamp- 
shire with 40 or 50 men, but his warriors exclusive of Nipmucks, 
were not numerous at any time, perhaps 200. His Wampanoags 
were not distinguished from other Indians and performed no 
greater deeds than others. It is a little remarkable that the his- 
tories, letters and other documents relating to this war, do not 
furnish any evidence that Philip, after he came among the Nip- 
mucks, was present in a single fight with the English. No partic- 
ular exploit or achievement performed by him is recorded. It 
is hardly to be doubted, however, that he was actively engaged in 
some of the furious attacks made upon the English near Con- 
necticut River. But the Nipmucks showed that they were cap- 
able of planning and executing daring enterprises without the 
assistance of Philip. They destroyed Brookfield, and made num- 
erous fierce assaults upon the garrison house. The river Nip- 
mucks burnt Springfield. The dreadful carnage and devastation 

*Gookin''s "Historical Collections," 1674 ^^d "Christian Indians," 1677. He was 
more pains-taking and accurate than some other writers. 

•{■Memoir of Plymouth Colony. 

{Statistical Collections, Vol. I., Part II. 

§George Memecho, a Christian Indian, who was taken by the Nipmucks, was present 
when PhUip and his party first came to the Nipmucks, on the fifth of August, a few miles 
from Brookfield, and he related that Philip then had about 40 men, besides women and 
children. The greater part of the men who were with him when he escaped from Pocasset, 
had left him. 


at Lancaster, Feb. lo, 1676, were chiefly the work of the Nip- 
mucks, when Philip was far distant. 

The Narragansets favored the hostile Indians, and protected 
those that fled to the Narraganset country, but did not assault the 
English plantations until February and March, 1676, after the 
English had destroyed their fort and many of their people. 

When assaults were made by Indians, it was impossible to 
know how many there were, and loose conjectures always exag- 
gerated their numbers. There is no reason to believe that 500 
Indians were engaged in any fight or attack during this war, the 
Narraganset swamp fight excepted. 

The number of Indians which the English imagined they had 
killed in an engagement, was usually much over-rated. They 
did not find the dead bodies, and could judge only by guess. 
They lelied too much upon what captive Indians "owned" or 
"confessed." These Indians often told a story to please those in 
whose power they were, and their admissions are seldom worthy 
of credit. 

Philip cherished enmity against the English, because he sup- 
posed they had wronged him; yet the tradition in Rhode Island, 
sixty years after his death, was, that Philip himself was not for 
war, but was forced into it by the fury of his young men, against 
his own judgment and inclination.* "The commencement of 
the war was accidental. "f 

There are no intimations that the Nipmucks, who entered into 
the war so furiously, had ever complained of being wronged by 
the English. The Qiiabaugs, and perhaps other Nipmucks, had 
long been accounted subjects of the Wampanoags, and when 
Uncas attacked the Quabaugs in i66i,they were defended by a 
brother of Philip. They were intimately connected with the 
Wampanoags, and readily joined them in the war. The Nor- 
wottucks and others near Connecticut River, were closely related 
to the Quabaugs. 

This memorable war began near Mount Hope, on Thursday, 
June 24, 1675, when the Wampanoags slew nine of the inhabit- 
ants of Swansey. Soldiers were sent from Boston and Plymouth, 
and Philip and his people fled to Pocasset, now in Tiverton; and 
houses were burnt and people slain in some places in the vicin- 
ity. The English enclosed Philip and his Indians in Pocasset 
Neck, but early on the first of August, they found means to escape. 

*Century Sermon in 1738, by Mr. Callender, a Baptist minister at Newport. 
•{•Bancroft's History of the United States. 


They were discovered at Rehoboth, and pursued towards the 
Nipmuck country, and fourteen slain. 

On the 14th of July, while Philip was near Pocasset, the Nip- 
mucks began their mischief, and killed four or five persons at 
Mendon. This was the first English blood shed in war, in 

When the war began, Hampshire county contained the follow- 
ing towns and plantations: — Springfield, including West Spring- 
field and Longmeadow; W^estfield, Northampton, Hadley, Hat- 
field, Deerfield, Northfield, Brookfield and Suffield. The people 
at Sufiield soon left the place; and if there were any settlers at 
Swampfield (Sunderland,) they did not long remain. 

The second attempt of the Nipmucks was in the county of 
Hampshire. The council ordered Capt. Edward Hutchinson to 
take Capt. Thomas Wheeler and about twenty horsemen, and 
Ephraim Curtis for a guide, and go to the Nipmucks near Qua- 
baug, and treat with them. They reached Brookfield, with 
three Christian Indians, on Sunday, the first of August. The 
Indians, who were at Meminimisset,* supposed to be about ten 
miles distant, northerly, promised to meet Capt. H. the next 
morning, on a plain,f about three miles from the village. On 
the 2d of August, Capt. H. and his party and three of the principal 
men of Brookfield, rode to the plain and found no Indians. Capt. 
H. was persuaded by the Brookfield men to go farther, and when 
they had proceeded northerly four or five miles, and were in a 
narrow passage, having a bushy, rocky hill on the right, and a 
thick swamp on the left, a large body of Indians lying in ambush 
on both sides, suddenly fired upon them and killed eight and 
wounded five. The survivors were forced to go up the steep hill, 
and by the guidance of the Christian Indians, they escaped to 
the village. Having arrived before the Indians, they took pos- 

*Meminimisset, or Wennimisset, the new seat of the Quabaugs in 1675, is often named 
in the Histories of this war. Ephraim Curtis visited it twice in July, 1675, ^^^ noticed 
its situation. Here Philip first came to the Nipmucks on the 5th of August. Mrs. Row- 
landson was brought to th-" same place, a captive, in February, 1676, and here her wounded 
child died. It was part of a tract of land which is now in New Braintree, about eight miles 
from West Brookfield, and has Ware river on the north, the meadow or swamp in which 
Meminimisset brook flows on the west and south, and the same low, swampy land on most 
of the east side. The road from Hardwick to New Braintree crosses it. I visited this 
place in 1854. — The spot where the party of Capt. Hutchinson was ambushed, was south- 
ward from the Quabaug camp, and cannot be identified. It seems to have been on the 
east side of the valley. 

■[■This plain is said to be near the head or north part of Wickabaug pond in West Brook- 


session of one of the largest and strongest houses,* and fortified 
themselves as well as they could in a short time. The inhabit- 
ants, fifteen or sixteen families, being informed of the disaster, 
all came in haste to the same house, bringing but little with them. 
The Indians soon flocked into the village and assailed the house 
with their bullets, and began to burn other buildings. During 
the two succeeding nights and days, they continued to besiege 
the house, and made various attempts to burn it, without success. 
One man was mortally wounded at the garret window, and 
another was killed without the building, and some others were 
wounded. The house contained twenty-six men capable of doing 
service, the wounded, and fifty women and children. The twenty- 
six men, vigilant and brave, extinguished the fires upon the 
building, and repelled the assaults of the Indians, until the even- 
ing of the third day, August 4th, when Major Simon Willard 
came to their relief with Capt. Parker and forty-six men and five 
friendly Indians. Before the next morning, the Indians left the 
place. The Indians were judged to be 300, and one afterwards 
taken, "confessed" that they had about 80 killed and wounded. f 

On the first night, Ephraim Curtis, to obtain help, crept out 
on his hands and knees, and reached Marlborough, on the morn- 
ing of August 4th. Some travelers towards Connecticut River, 
observing the burning at Quabauo;, returned to Marlboroujrh, 
the same morning, a little before Curtis arrived, and a post had 
been sent to Major Willard, who was near Lancaster. 

The eight persons killed by the Indians in ambush, were 
Sergeant John Ayres, Sergeant William Pritchard, and Corporal 
Richard Coy, all of Brookfield; Zechariah Phillips, Timothy 
Farley, Edward Coburn, Samuel Smedley and Shadrach Hapgood, 
of other towns. Captain Hutchinson, severely wounded at the 
same time, died at Marlborough, Aug. 19. Those killed at the 
house were Henry Young, and Samuel Pritchard, son of Wm. P. 
Besides these eleven, James Hovey and another were slain some- 
where in Brookfield the same day.| 

*They selected the house used for an inn, and the Hampshire records show that John 
Ayres kept the inn. It was on Foster's Hill, and the site is about 60 or 70 rods south-east 
of the dwelling-house of the late Judge Foster. The village was on this hill, and the road 
between Hadley and Springfield and Boston, passed over this hill, near 150 years after 

■j-Capt. Wheeler's Narrative. — Perhaps there were 200 Indians. If the 26 men killed 
and wounded half of 80, they did well. 

J^'A list of men slain in the county of Hampshire" in 1675, prepared by Rev. John 
Russell of Hadley, and now in the State archives, says 13 men were slain at Quabaug, 
Sept. 2, but names only 11. 

In the printed accounts of the destruction of Brookfield, the Christian name of Sergt. 


The wounded left the house as soon as they were able to travel, 
and the inhabitants of the town removed to other places.* The 
buildings were all burnt except that of John Ayres, and another 
that was unfinished. The meeting-house was burnt, and also 
a grist-mill owned by John Pynchon. A garrison was kept in the 
place till sometime in October, and it was re-established early 
in March, 1676. 

The events at Brookfield produced much alarm in the colony 
and especially in Hampshire county. Major John Pynchon of 
Springfield, sent a messenger to the Governor and Council of 
Connecticut, August 5th, and Capt. Thomas Watts of Hartford 
and 40 dragoons came up to Springfield on the 6th, where 27 
dragoons under Lieut. Thomas Cooper and 10 Springfield Indians 
joined them, and all marched to Brookfield on the 7th. Captains 
Lothrop and Beers, sent up by the Council at Boston, arrived at 
Brookfield the same day. On the 8th, they proceeded northerly 
to the place called Meminimisset, but found no Indians. The 
Springfield company proceeded ten miles further but found no 
track of Indians, and they returned to Springfield on the loth. 
The others returned to Brookfield. A company of 30 river In- 
dians from towns about Hartford came up and ranged the woods 
with the others; and Joshua, son of Uncas, came up with 30 
Indians, Aug. 9th. Major John Talcott was sent up Aug. 12th, 
to consult with Major Pynchon and others in Hampshire. Capt. 
Mosely of Boston came up to Brookfield with his company, and 
left for Lancaster, Aug. 15. Major Willard continued at Brook- 
field some time. 

After the arrival of troops at Brookfield, the Nipmucks and 
Wampanoags seem to have fled northerly to Paquayag, now 
Athol, and other places in that neighborhood. The English could 
not trace Philip, after he came into the Nipmuck country, and 
knew not certainly where he was for some months. 

After Philip's escape from Pocasset, Plymouth Colony was 
nearly free from the ravages of Indians for six or seven months; 
and excepting those slain at Alendon, July 14, some at Lancaster, 
Aug. 22, and two others, the Indians killed none in Massachusetts, 
east of Brookfield, in 1675, "^'" ^"^'^l February, 1676. The hostile 
Indians were gathered together in the region about Connecticut 

Pritchard, is erroneously Joseph or John, and Corp. Coy's is by mistake John. The 
Hampshire records and Pynchon accounts prove that the former was WilHam and the 
latter Richard. 

*John Warner and his sons and some others came to Hadley. Mr. John Younglove, 
who had been preaching at Brookfield, came to Hadley, perhaps before 1675. 


River, after the latter part of August, 1675, and their fury fell 
upon the Hampshire villages and the troops sent to their aid. 

The troops under Captains Lothrop, Beers, and Watts, and 
the Connecticut Indians, explored the country up Swift River, 
Connecticut River and elsewhere for some days, without meeting 
an enemy. Some of our Norwottuck Indians went forth with 
them. Major Pynchon wrote to Secretary AUyn of Connecti- 
cut, in the night of Aug. 22d, and stated that Capt. Watts had 
returned to Hadley, and the Bay forces to Quabaug; that nothing 
had been done, except the burning of about 50 wigwams found 
empty: that our Indians that went out were suspected of being 
treacherous; and that the enemy was supposed to be at Paquayag. 
Major Pynchon wished to have Capt. Watts remain longer, and 
make discovery of the enemy at Paquayag, but he and the Con- 
necticut Indians soon returned to Hartford; he left ten men at 
Deerfield. A guard of 20 men had been sent to Northfield. Cap- 
tains Lothrop and Beers came to Hadley about the 23d of August. 

Mr. Stoddard's Letter. 
Rev. Solomon Stoddard, of Northampton, wrote the following 
letter to the Rev. Increase Mather, dated Sept. 15, 1675, which is 
copied from Mather's "Brief History of the War with the Indians 
in New England," printed in 1676. Mr. Stoddard sent to Con- 
necticut, the "Reasons alleged for demanding the arms of the 
Indians of Northampton and Hadley," more extended than those 
in his letter to Mr. Mather, and extracts are made from the 

"Reverend and dear brother, 

I received yours, wherein among other things, you desire an account of the passages 
of our war with the Indians. I shall, in answer to your desire, relate the most remarkable 
passages. The people here having many causes of jealousy of the unfaithfulness of our 
Indians, presented the same before the committees of the militia, whereupon it was thought 
meet to desire of them the surrendry of their arms, and by persuasion obtained about nine 
and twenty. But about three days after, they being desirous to go forth with some forces 
from Hartford, both Indians and English, and some from the Bay, in pursuit of Philip, 
their arms were delivered to them again; but a while after their return, jealousies still in- 
creasing, there was a general desire in the people of these three towns, that they should be 
again disarmed, and such things as these were presented to the council here, as inducing 
thereunto: — [Reasons for disarming the Indians, i. The Indians were wont in former 
years, to apply for ground to plant on, in the winter and beginning of spring. This year 
they desired not ground to plant on till planting time. 2. Many went to Quabaug to 
our enemies. 3. Wappaye told Deac. Goodman of Hadley, before the war broke out, that 
there would be war between the Indians and English this summer. 4. Before tidings of 
the war in Plymouth colony had been received, our Indians, who in all times of danger and 
war, had been wont to seek shelter by crowding into our homelots, as near our houses as 
possible, and begging house-room for their stuff and themselves, now, on a sudden, plucked 
up their wigwams, and took away the goods they had laid up in our houses. 5. They shot 
bullets at our men five several times, in diverse places, — one at John Clary as he was passing 
by the fort in the road, between Northampton and Hatfield. 6. After men were killed at 


Quabaug, they made eleven triumphing shouts, as their manner is when they have slain 
their enemies. 7. An Indian woman told the English that two of Philip's men were come 
to the fort. 8. A Frenchman going towards Quabaug, saw three Indians, who told him 
they were coming to Norwottuck to persuade the Indians to join in the war. 9. When 
our Indians went out with the army, all were dissatisfied with their behavior, and Joshua, 
son of Uncas, said our Indians made fools of the English. 10. The sachems of the Connect- 
icut Indians advised us to disarm them. 11. When they were with our army, near Poteti- 
paog, they said they must not fight against their mothers, brothers and cousins, (for Qua- 
baug Indians are related to them.) 12. Their carriage was surly and insolent. 13. A 
squaw counselled goodwife Wright to get into town with her children, and said she durst 
not tell her news, for the Indians would cut off her head. Wappawy confessed that he 
and several of our Indians had been with Philip.] Other things too many to enumerate 
were presented, and the council saw cause to demand their arms, August 24th. They 
made some objections but were fully answered. The sachem left the council, to try whether 
he could persuade the Indians, promising however to bring in his own, [arms.] In the 
afternoon, the council sent to the fort for their answer; they told the messenger that some 
Indians were abroad in the meadows, and they were not willing to deliver up their arms 
without their consent, but in the morning they should have their answer. The messenger 
was desired to go again to them in the evening, to confer with them, to try whether he could 
persuade them, and coming to the other side of the river, wished some of them to come over; 

they bid him come over to them, and bid him kiss • — — . Whereupon Captains Loth- 

rop and Beers,* with whom the thing was left, intended to take their arms by force, and 
at midnight sent over to our officers, to draw as nigh the fort as they could without being 
perceived, and they would do the like on Hatfield side, and so at break of day come upon 
them, but before they came, the Indians were fled, having killed an old sachem who 
was not willing to go with them. The captains resolved to follow them, and pursued a 
great pace after them, with about an hundred men, having sent back a part of ours for a 
guard of the town. They intended to parley with the Indians, but on a sudden the Indians 
let fly about forty guns at them and were soon answered by a volley from our men; about 
forty ran down into the swamp after them, poured in shot upon them, made them throw 
down much of their luggage, and after a while, our men, after the Indian manner, got 
behind trees and watched their opportunities to make shots at them. The fight contin- 
ued about three hours; we lost six men upon the ground, though one was shot in the back 
by our own men; a seventh died of his wound coming home, and two died the next night, 
nine in all, of nine several towns, every one of these towns lost a man.-j- Of the Indians, 
as we hear since by a squaw that was taken, and by three children that came to our town 
from them the day after, there were slain twenty-six.J An Indian and a squaw both own 
that our Indians received wompam from Philip in the spring. After this fight we heard 
no more of them till the first of September, when they shot down a garrison soldier of 

♦Captains Lothrop and Beers were in Hadley. The messenger had been sent on that 
side, and the river was between him and the fort. The captains sent over at midnight, 
''to our ofBcers," that is, the Northampton officers. Captains L. and B. crossed the river 
from Hadley into Hatfield and marched down towards the fort, while the Northampton 
men marched up to it. The fort was about half way between the two villages. 

fThe nine persons slain in this first fight near Connecticut River, were: — Azariah Dick- 
inson of Hadley, son of Nathaniel D.; Samuel Mason of Northampton, only son of Thomas 
M.; Richard Fellows of Hatfield, son of Richard F., deceased; James Levens, John 
Plummer,Mark Pitman, Joseph Person, Matthew Scales, William Cluff, from six eastern 

jAs the Indians chose their own ground, and fought in their own way, it is hardly to 
be believed that they lost more men than the English. 

Menowniet, a half Narraganset and half Mohegan Indian, was in this engagement; 
he affirmed that no Indians were killed, in this fight. This testimony is not to be relied 
on, but is as worthy of credit as many things more favorable to the English, which the 
Indians "owned." 


Pocomptuck * that was looking after his horse, and ran violently up into the town, many 
people having scarcely time enough to get into the garrisons. That day, they burnt most 
of their houses and barns, the garrisons not being strong enough to sally out upon them, 
but killed two of their men from the forts. The next day [Sept. 2d] they set upon several 
men that were gone out of the fort at Squakheag; they slew eight of our men, not above 
one of them being slain that we know of, but made no attempt upon the fort. The next 
day [Sept. 3,] this onset being unknown, Capt. Beers set forth [from Hadley,] with about 
thirty-six men and some carts to fetch off the garrison at Squakheag, and coming within 
three miles of the place, the next morning [Sept. 4th,] were set upon by a great number of 
Indians from the side of a swamp, where was a hot dispute for some time. They having 
lost their Captain and some others, resolved at last to fly, and going to take horse, lost sev- 
eral men more, I think about twelve; the most that escaped got to Hadley that evening; 
next morning another came in, and at night another that had been taken by the Indians, 
and loosed from his bonds by a Natick Indian; he tells that the Indians were all drunk 
that night, that they mourned much for the loss of a great captain, that the English had 
killed twenty-five of their men. Six days after, another soldier came in, who had been 
lost ever since the fight, and was almost famished, and so lost his understanding that he 
knew not what day the fight was on.-)- 

On the 5th of September, [Sunday] Major Treat set forth for Squakheag with above an 
hundred men; next day coming nigh Squakheag, his men were much daunted to see the 
headsof Capt. Beers' soldiers upon poles by the wayside. f After they were come to Squak- 
heag, some were fired upon by about fourteen Indians, Major Treat was struck upon the 
thigh, but not harmed. Coming to the fort, he concluded forthwith to bring off the 
garrison; so they came away the same night, [Sept. 6th] leaving the cattle there, and the 
dead bodies unburied, since which, seventeen of their cattle came a great part of the way 
themselves, and have since been fetched into Hadley.§ 

Upon the 1 2th of this month, [Sunday] the Indians made an assault upon twenty-two 
men of Pocomptuck, that were going from one garrison to the other to meeting, in the after- 
noon, made a great volley of shot at them, but killed not one man; they escaped to the 
garrison whither they were going, only one man, running to the other garrison, was taken 

*This was James Eggleston of Windsor, left at Deerfield by Capt. Watts. Menowniet 
was in this attack. He said the Indians were about 60, and that they killed one English- 

■{•A note in Mather says the men fought till their powder and shot were spent; and the 
Indians killed above twenty and only thirteen escaped. A cart with some ammunition 
fell into the hands of the enemy. According to Hubbard, Capt. Beers went up with sup- 
plies for the garrison; and they were set upon "very near to the town" out of the bushes, 
by a swamp side, and Capt. Beers and about 20 of his men were slain. 

The swampy ravine south of the village of Northfield, where the Indians were in am- 
bush, and Beers's Plain, across which the soldiers retreated, to their horses, are well known 
at this day. Men now living have found bones and bullets near where the fighting took 

Mr. Russell, in his list, reports only sixteen slain at Squakeag, Sept. 4, and gives the 
names of eleven, viz., Capt. Richard Beers, John Chenary, Ephraim Child, Benjamin 
Crackbone, Robert Pepper, George Lyruss, John Gatchell, James Miller, John Wilson, 
Joseph Dickinson [of Northfield], William Markham, Jr. [of Hadley, an only son; he was 
with a team.] Robert Pepper, erroneously numbered among the slain, was taken, and 
was with the Indians when Mrs. Rowlandson was a captive. Capt. Beers was from Water- 
town, and was in the Pequot war 38 years before. His widow died June 19, 1706, aged 92. 

jHubbard says one man, if not more, was found with a chain hooked into his under 
jaw, and so hung upon the bough of a tree. It was feared that he was hung up alive. 

§Cattle often fled from the Indians and sought the protection of the English. When 
Major Willard came near Brookfield, the cattle which had been frightened away by the 
yells and firing of the Indians, fell into his rear and followed him and his company into 
the village. In this and later Indian wars, the people were always alarmed, when the 
cattle ran furiously out of the woods to the village. 


alive.* The Indians took up their rendezvous on an hillj- in the meadow, burnt two 
more houses, killed many horses, and carried away horse-loads of beef and pork to the 
hill. The next day, we persuaded some of our inhabitants to go volunteers, and sent to 
Hadley to do the like, who going up with some of Capt. Lothrop's soldiers, joined them- 
selves to the garrison at Pocomptuck, and on Tuesday [Sept. 14th,] very early went out 
to assault the Indians, but they were all fled. Last night Capt. Mosely and his men came 
into Hadley, and this night we expect more forces from Hartford. If the Lord give not 
sudden check to these Indians, it is to be feared that most of the Indians in the country 
will rise. 

I desire you would speak to the governor, that there may be some thorough care for a 
Reformation. I am sensible there are many difficulties therein; many sins are grown so in 
fashion, that it becomes a question whether they be sins or not. I desire you would espe- 
cially mention oppression, that intolerable pride in clothes and hair;J the toleration of so 
many taverns, especially in Boston, and suffering home-dwellers to lie tippling in them. 
Let me hear soon from you. The Lord bless you and your labors. Forget us not at the 
throne of grace." [A small part of the letter is omitted.] 

The Norwottucks and Pocomtucks. — The fight between the 
Norwottuck Indians and their pursuers happened "about ten 
miles above Hatfield, at a place called Sugar Loaf Hill," accord- 
ing to Hubbard; "at a swamp beyond Hatfield," accordingto Mr. 
Russell of Hadley. The place is now unknown. These Indians 
left their native valley, in the night succeeding August 24th, and 
never dwelt in it again. No doubt there were some among them, 
especially females like the one that informed goodwife Wright of 
her danger, who were favorable to the English, and left the fort 
with heavy hearts. The kindly greeting and the friendly " netop "§ 
between them and the English, were now at an end. 

Their number when they fled may have been between 200 and 
225, with 50 or 55 fighting men. They manifested more spirit 
and energy in the war than they had been supposed to possess, 
and this may be said of some other tribes. 

The Norwottucks united with the Pocomtucks not long after the 
fight of Aug. 25. Hubbard says the Deerfield Indians withdrew 
from the English and joined the hostile Indians, but no circum- 
stances are given relative to their defection. Both tribes may 
have united in the assault upon Deerfield, Sept. 1st. They were 
the only enemies on the west side of the Connecticut for some time. 

The tidings of the fight of August 25th reached Hartford the 
same day, and the next day, the Council sent up George Graves 
and twenty men, " to assist the plantations of Norwottog." 

*He was probably slain then or soon after. Mr. Russell has the name of Nathaniel 
Cornberry, slain at Deerfield. 

•j-This hill is now a conspicuous object in Deerfield meadow. It was a hiding and 
watching place for the Indians. 

jThis pride in hair, may allude to wigs which were coming into fashion. 

§This Indian word was handed down by our ancestors, and it was not uncommon , 
40 years ago, to hear two intimate friends called "great netops." 


On the 31st, Major Talcott was again sent up to consult with 
Major Pynchon. On the 3d of September, Major Treat came 
up with men from the counties of Fairfield, New Haven and Hart- 
ford. He marched to Northfield and brought down the garrison 
and inhabitants, and then returned to Hartford, Sept. 9, leaving 
some of his forces in garrison, in three or four towns. Capt. 
Appleton of Ipswich was here. 

After Major Treat left Northfield, Sept. 6, the Indians destroyed 
this small village. This was the second place in Hampshire 
county that was laid waste.* It had been settled only two or 
three years, but contained nearly as many families as Brookfield. 
Most of them were from Northampton. They had no minister 
nor meeting-house, but William Janes, a competent person, used 
to pray and exhort in pleasant weather, under a broad-spreading 

The Nipmucks and Wampanoags, whom the English captains 
had long sought after in vain, first showed themselves upon Con- 
necticut River on the first day of September, and made an attack 
upon Hadley. As our river Indians were engaged the same day 
at Deerfield, these must have been the Indians who came from 
the east. And it can hardly be doubted that they killed the eight 
men at Northfield, Sept. 2d, attacked Capt. Beers, Sept. 4, and 
fired upon Major Treat, Sept. 6. They exulted in their successes, 
and after Northfield was deserted, lived upon the good things 
which the English had left. They seem not to have crossed the 
river and united with the river Indians, until about the middle of 

An attack upon Hadley repelled by the aid of Gen. Goffe, 

The interesting events that took place in Hadley, on Wednes- 
day, the first of September, 1675, have been but imperfectly dis- 
closed. It was necessary at the time, and long after, to throw a 
veil over the transactions of that day, which has been, and can be, 
only partially removed. In the house of the Rev. John Russell 
had long been concealed two men, who were worthy of respect 
and honor, viz.. Generals Edward Whalley and William Goffe. 
They had been conspicuous in the revolutions of England, and 
had been instrumental in bringing a guilty king, Charles I, to 
the block. They were of course odious to all who believed in 

*The eight men slain at Northfield, Sept. 2d, were: — Serg. Samuel Wright, Ebenezer 
Janes, Jonathan Janes, Ebenezer Parsons, Nathaniel Curtis, Benjamin Dunwich, Thomas 
Scott, John Peck. The first five were from Northampton, and all but Sergt. Wright were 
young men. 


the divine right of kings, and after the restoration of Charles II, 
were pursued and hunted by the minions of royalty. Mr. Rus- 
sell, who feared not to do what he thought to be right, received 
them into his house in 1664, where they remained hidden from 
the world, and even from the people of Hadley. A few persons 
were in the secret in that town and elsewhere. Had their place 
of residence been discovered by their enemies, they and Mr. 
Russell and others would have been exposed to destruction. 
Whalley was superannuated in 1675, but Goffe was still capable 
of service. 

The fight at Hadley, is thus concisely noticed by Mather.* On 
the first of September, "one of the churches in Boston was seeking 
the face of God by fasting and prayer before him. Also that very 
day, the church in Hadley was before the Lord in the same way, 
but were driven from the holy service they were attending, by a 
most sudden and violent alarm, which routed them the whole day 
after." This was all that Mather dared to publish in 1676; and 
Hubbard does not even allude to the fight. f Nothing more 
appeared in print until Governor Hutchinson published his His- 
tory of Massachusetts in 1760, in which the following notice of 
GofFe's heroic act appeared in a pote. 

"The town of Hadley was alarmed by the Indians in 1675, ''^ '^^ '^''''^^ °f public worship, 
and the people were in the utmost confusion. J Suddenly a grave, elderly person appeared 
in the midst of them. In his mien and dress he differed from the rest of the people. He 
not only encouraged them to defend themselves, but put himself at their head, rallied, 
instructed and led them on to encounter the enemy, who by this means were repulsed. 
As suddenly the deliverer of Hadley disappeared. The people were left in consternation, 
utterly unable to account for this strange phenomenon. It is not probable that they were 
ever able to explain it. If Goffe had been then discovered, it must have come to the knowl- 
edge of those persons, who declare by their letters that they never knew what became of 

This attack was on the first of September, according to Hutch- 
inson. He says this anecdote of Goffe was handed down through 
Governor Leverett's family. Gov. L. was at Hadley while the 
judges were there. § 

*He probably knew all the particulars. Mr. Stoddard may have communicated them 
to him. 

•[•Ho3rt, in his Antiquarian Researches, expresses an opinion that September first is 
an erroneous date, because Hubbard did not mention any attack upon Hadley, at that 
time. Hubbard had good reasons for his silence. Hoyt had not seen Mather's History. 

JCaptains Lothrop and Beers were then in Hampshire county, but may have been on 
the west side of the river. 

§Traditions are to be very cautiously received, but this seems to be entitled to credit. 
Gov. Hutchinson's father was born before Philip's war, and must have been well acquainted 
with the Leverett family. The widow of Gov. Leverett died in 1704, only seven years 
before Gov. H. was born. 


President Stiles, in his History of three of the Judges of Charles 
I, published in 1794, thus relates the story of the angel that ap- 
peared at Hadley. 

"Though told with some variation in different parts of New England, the true story 
of the angel is this. That pious congregation were observing a fast at Hadley, on occasion 
of the war; and being at public worship in the meeting-house there, on a fast day, Sep- 
tember I, 1675, were suddenly surrounded and surprised by a body of Indians. It was 
the usage in the frontier towns, and even at New Haven, in those Indian wars, for a select 
number of the congregation to go armed to public worship. It was so at Hadley at this 
time. The people immediately took to their arms, but were thrown into great conster- 
nation and confusion. Had Hadley been taken, the discovery of the Judges had been in- 
evitable. Suddenly, and in the midst of the people there appeared a man of very venerable 
aspect, and different from the inhabitants in his apparel, who took the command, arranged, 
and ordered them in the best military manner, and under his direction they repelled and 
routed the Indians, and the town was saved. He immediately vanished, and the inhabit- 
ants could not account for the phenomenon, but by considering that person as an Angel 
sent of God upon that special occasion for their deliverance; and for some time after said 
and believed that they had been delivered and saved by an Angel. Nor did they know 
or conceive otherwise till fifteen or twenty years after, when it at length became known at 
Hadley that the two Judges had been secreted there; which probably they did not know 
till after Mr. Russell's death, in 1692. This story, however, of the Angel at Hadley, was 
before this universally diffused thro' New-England by means of the memorable Indian 
war of 1675. T'^^ mystery was unriddled after the revolution, [in England in 1688,] when 
it became not so very dangerous to have it known that the Judges had received an asylum 
here, and that Goffe was actually in Hadley at that time. The Angel was certainly Gen- 
eral Goffe, for Whalley was superannuated in 1675.*" 

Capt. Samuel Mosely came to Hadley with a company of about 
sixty Bay soldiers, on the 14th of September, and soon after went 
up to Deerfield. On the 15th or i6th, Major Treat arrived at 
Northampton with more Connecticut troops. Capt. John 
Mason, of Norwich, was ordered to lead a company of Mohegans 
and Pequots up to Norwottuck and other plantations. Capt. 
Lothrop's head-quarters were at Hadley. 

Capt. Lothrop and his company slain at Muddy Brook. 

A large quantity of grain at Deerfield had been thrashed and 
teams and drivers provided to convey the grain and other articles 
to Hadley. Capt. Lothrop and his company were to guard them, 
and they commenced their march on Saturday, Sept. i8th. The 
eastern Indians had crossed to the west side of the river and 
united with the others; and they had watched the movements of 
the English without being discovered. The succeeding account 
is from Mather. 

"September i8, Captain Lothrop, a godly and courageous commander, with abou 
seventy men, were sent to be as a guard to some that were coming from Deerfield with cart 
laden with goods and provisions, to be removed to Hadley for s ecurity. But as they wer 

*Pres. Stiles errs in supposing the meeting-house was surrounded by Indians. — Hutch- 
inson does not allude to the angel story. 


coming, the Indians lurked in the swamps and multitudes of them made a sudden and 
frightful assault.* They seized upon the carts and goods, (many of the soldiers having 
been so foolish and secure as to put their arms in the carts, and step aside to gather grapes, 
which proved dear and deadly grapes to them,) killed Capt. Lothrop and above three 
score of his men, stripped them of their clothes, and so left them to lie weltering in their 
own blood. Capt. Mosely, who was gone out [from Deerfield] to range the woods, hearing 
the guns, hastened to their help, but before he could come, the other captain and his men 
were slain, as hath been expressed. Nevertheless he gave the Indians battle; they were 
in such numbers as that he and his company were in extreme danger. In the nick of time. 
Major Treatj- with above an hundred men, and three score of Uncas his Indians, came in 
to succor those that were so beset with the enemy, whereupon the enemy presently retreated 
and night coming on, there was no pursuing of them. In this fight but few of Capt. Mose- 
ly 's men were slain.J How maijy Indians were killed is uncertain; it being their manner 
to draw away their dead men as fast as they are killed, if possibly they can do it. I am 
informed that some of the Indians have reported that they lost ninety-six men that day, 
and that they had above forty wounded, many of whom died afterwards.§ However, 
this was a black and fatal day, wherein there were eight persons made widows and six and 
twenty children made fatherless, all in one little plantation, and in one day;|| and above 
sixty persons buried in one dreadful grave." 

Hubbard ascribes this great defeat to a wrong notion of Capt. 
Lothrop, that it was best to fight Indians in their own way, by 
skulking behind trees.** Hoyt thinks they wanted circumspection 
on the previous march, and that destruction was unavoidable, 
after they fell into an ambuscade. Hubbard says Lothrop's 
company were "the very flower of the county of Essex, none of 
which were ashamed to speak with the enemy in the gate." 
Capt. Lothrop was from Beverly, and left a widow but no children. 

Major Treat and Capt. Mosely went to Deerfield that night, 
and returned to Muddy brook the next morning, and buried the 

*The place of this assault was near Muddy brook, a small stream, which now crosses 
the highway in the village of South Deerfield. It was called Muddy brook before and after 
this disaster; and has since often been named Bloody brook. 

j-Major Treat marched for Squakeag that morning, probably from Northampton, and 
arrived near Muddy brook "in the nick of time." 

^According to Mr. Russell's list, he lost three men, viz., Peter Barron, John Oates 
and another. According to Hubbard, he had two men killed and eight or nine wounded. 

§One-eyed John, a Nipmuck sagamore, told James Quannapohit, that he lost only one 
man in the fight with Capt. Lothrop, and one with Capt. Beers; and that the other Indians 
lost but two men. These Indian stories cannot be confided in. The Indian report 
about the loss of 96 men deserves not the least credit. 

||This "little plantation" was Deerfield, and seven of the husbands and fathers that 
were slain, were Samuel Hinsdale, who left 6 children; John Allen, 2 or 3 chUdren; Joseph 
Gillet, 6 children; John Allen, 2 or 3 children; Joshua Carter, 2 or 3 children; Zebadiah 
Williams, 2 children; Philip Barsham, children. The eighth may have been Robert Hins- 
dale the father of the other Hinsdales, or John Hinsdale. 

**Hubbard remarks of Indian fighting: — "The Indians durst not look an Englishman 
in the face in an open field, nor ever yet were known to kill any man with their guns, unless 
when they could lie in wait for him in an ambush, or behind some shelter, takmg aim un- 
discovered." He might have concluded from this Indian mode of warfare, that the English 
would ordinarily kill very few Indians. 


A postscript to a letter from the Council of Massachusetts to 
Richard Smith in the Narraganset country, dated Sept. 22, 1675, 
gives a short account of the first reports of this sad disaster : — 

"This morning, was received sad intelligence from Hadley; that upon Saturday last, 
Capt. Lothrop with about sixty men, being appointed to conduct from Deerfield to Hadley 
with carriages and cattle, they were surprised by abundance of Indians that lay in ambush- 
ment and received a dreadful blow; insomuch that above forty of Capt. Lothrop's men 
with himself were slain. Capt. Mosely being not far off, engaged with the Indians and 
fought several hours and lost eleven men;* others also were slain that belonged to the car- 
riages, [carts,] so that the next day they buried sixty-four men in all. The Indians were 
judged to be near five hundred." 

Accounts differ as to the number of English slain. The "List 
of men slain in the county of Hampshire" made out by Rev. 
Mr. Russell, of Hadley, says seventy-one men v^^ere slain at 
Muddy Brook bridge, the i8th of September. f This statement 
is more to be depended on than any other. It includes all the 
teamsters that were killed. 

It may be doubted whether the soldiers and teamsters under 
Capt. Lothrop w^ere more than eighty. About fifty-four of the 
soldiers, and seventeen of the teamsters, were slain. Above 
sixty were buried in one grave, — probably the sixty-four mentioned 
in the letter sent to Boston. Some of the teamsters may have 
been buried in the towns below. 

The number of Indians engaged, according to the first report 
sent to Boston, was "near five hundred." This is undoubtedly 
too high an estimate, but other accounts swelled the number to 
seven or eight hundred, and even to twelve hundred. If the 

*This number included his wounded men. 

•j-Mr. Russell gives the names of only fifty-nine. Of these, forty-two were soldiers, 
viz., Capt. Thomas Lothrop, Sergt. Thomas Smith, Samuel Stevens, John Hobbs, Daniel 
Button, John Harriman, Thomas Bayley, Ezekiel Sawier, Jacob Kilborne, Thomas Man- 
ning, Jacob Wainwright, Benjamin Roper, John Bennet, Thomas Mentor, Caleb Kimball, 
Thomas Hobs, Robert Homes, Edward Traske, Richard Lambert, Josiah Dodge, Peter 
Woodberry, Joseph Balch, Samuel Whitteridge, William Duy, Serg. Samuel Stevens, 
Samuel Crumpton, John Plum, Thomas Buckley, George Ropes, Joseph Kinge, Thomas 
Alexander, Francis Friende, Abel Osyer, John Littleale, Samuel Hudson, Adam Clarke, 
Ephraim Farah, Robert Wilson, Stephen Welman, Benjamin Farnell, Solomon Alley, 
John Merrit, 42. 

J^ames of Deerfield Teamsters and a few others. — Robert Hinsdale and his three sons, 
Samuel Hinsdale, Barnabas Hinsdale, and John Hinsdale; Joseph Gillet, John Allen, 
Joshua Carter, John Barnard, James Tufts, Jonathan Plympton, Philip Barsham, Thomas 
Wells, William Smead, (Jr.,) Zebadiah Williams, Eliakim Marshall, James Mudge, George 
Cole, 17. 

Eleven or twelve of these seventeen were Deerfield teamsters and perhaps more. John 
Barnard, a teamster, was a son of Francis Barnard of Hadley. Thomas Wells, Eliakim 
Marshall, James Mudge and George Cole are placed with the teamsters by Mr. Russell; 
but may not have belonged to Deerfield. 


Indians were four hundred, they were six times as numerous as 
the soldiers. 

Several men that were with Capt. Lothrop escaped, seven or 
eight according to Hubbard. Some of their names appear on 
petitions to the General Court. A few belonged to Suffolk 
county. James Bennet from Boston, a resident in Northampton, 
was slain. 

In two or three days after Capt. Lothrop's defeat, the garrison 
and inhabitants of Deerfield abandoned the place, and a third 
village in Hampshire county was given up to desolation. Deer- 
field was a recent, but thriving village, containing more than 
twenty families, and having a minister, Mr. Samuel Mather, 
afterwards of Windsor. The surviving inhabitants retired to 
Hatfield and other places. In a petition to the General Court in 
1678, of the "remnant of Deerfield's poor inhabitants," scat- 
tered into several towns, they say truly, that "their houses are 
burnt, their estates wasted, and the ablest of their inhabitants 
killed, and their plantation become a wilderness, a dwelling 
place for owls," &c. 

The Commissioners of the New England Colonies met at 
Boston in September. They ordered that Massachusetts should 
complete their soldiers already in Hampshire to 300, and Connect- 
icut theirs to 200. These were not to be fixed in garrisons, but 
to be employed for a field army, to pursue the enemy, &c. 

About the first of October, Capt. Samuel Appleton and Capt. 
Joseph Sill had each a company at Hadley, and Capt. Samuel 
Mosely at Hatfield. On the 4th of October, Lieut. Phinehas 
Upham was sent up with 30 men, and Capt. Jonathan Poole, of 
Reading, was here a few days after. The Pequots, Mohegans, 
and some friendly Nipmucks called Wabaquassucks, returned to 
Hartford, Sept. 23d, but some Connecticut troops remained. 

Secretary Rawson wrote, Sept. 30: — "the slaughter in your 
parts has much dampened many spirits for the war. Some men 
escape away from the press, and others hide away after they are 

Major Pynchon wrote to the Council, from Hadley, Sept. 30, 
as follows: — 

"We are endeavoring to discover the enemy, and daily send out scouts, but little is effect- 
ed. Our English are somewhat awk and fearful in scouting and spying, though we do the 
best we can. We have no Indian friends here to help us. We find the Indians have their 
scouts out. Two days ago two Englishmen at Northampton, being gone out in the morning 
to cut wood, and but a little from the house, were both shot down dead, having two bullets 


apiece shot into each of their breasts. The Indians cut off their scalps, took their arras and 
were off in a trice.*" 

About the 26th of September, Major Pynchon's farm-house 
and barns, on the west side of the river, with all the grain and hay, 
were set on fire by a few Indians, and consumed. f — Major P. 
thought himself not fitted to be commander of all the troops sent 
into the county, and he requested to be discharged, before the 
middle of September, and the request was urgently repeated. 
On the 4th of October, the Council appointed Capt. Samuel 
Appleton, of Ipswich, commander in chief of the united forces, 
and he took the command on the 12th of October. 

On the 28th of August, the Council of Connecticut advised 
Maj. Pynchon not to disarm the Springfield Indians, but to take 
hostages of them. This advice appears to have been followed, 
and the hostages were kept at Hartford. The Indians continued 
to profess friendship for the English, but at length roused by the 
victories of the Indians up the river, rather than excited by the 
arts of Philip, they determined to aid in the work of destroying 
the English towns. Their principal fort on the east side of the 
river was at Longhill, towards Longmeadow. Their chief was 
commonly named Wequogon, an old sachem, who, with his wife 
Awonusk, sold Hockanum and a part of South Hadley to the 
people of Hadley in 1662. Hubbard says the sachem of the 
Springfield Indians was father of the Hadley sachem, | and on 
this account, he supposes the former was more easily persuaded 
to join with the Hadley Indians. 

Major Pynchon, who spent much of his time at Hadley, the 
head-quarters for this county, learning that a body of Indians 
had been in the vicinity of Hadley mill, called off all the soldiers 
stationed at Springfield, on the 4th of October, intending to have 
his forces go against the enemy that night or the next day. On 
the same day, Oct. 4th, Toto, a Windsor Indian, informed the 
people of Windsor or Hartford of a plot of the Indians, to burn 
Springfield and massacre the inhabitants the next day. An 
express was sent up to Springfield; and from that place a post 
was dispatched to Major Pynchon at Hadley, where he arrived 

*0n the 28th of September, Praisever Turner and his man, Uzackaby Shackspeer, 
were killed at Northampton. Some have imagined that the latter was a relative of Shak- 
speare. Maj. Pynchon calls him an Englishman, but the first name does not appear to 
be English. Praisever Turner's house and lot were within a few rods of the present resi- 
dence of the writer of this volume, on Elm street. 

■{•Major Pynchon hired 24 cattle kept at Lyme, Conn, the next winter. 

Jl have seen no evidence that Wequogon was the father of Sancumachu, the principal 
sachem of Hadley. Perhaps Sancumachu had married a daughter of Wequogon. 


some time in the night. He brought tidings that five hundred of 
PhiUp's and other Indians were in Springfield fort, ready to fall 
upon the town the next day. Another post was sent to Major 
Treat, who was at Westfield. Major Pynchon marched for 
Springfield the next morning, Tuesday, Oct. 5th, with Capt. 
Appleton and Capt. Sill and about 190 soldiers. The following 
extracts from letters, written near the time, will tell the sad story 
of the desolation at Springfield. 

Letter from Major John Pynchon to the Rev. John Russell of Hadley. — Extracts. 

"Springfield, Oct. 5, 1675. 
Reverend Sir, 

The Lord will have us lie in the dust before him. It is the Lord and blessed be his 
holy name. We came to a lamentable and woeful sight: the town in flames, not a house 
nor barn standing except old Goodman Branch's, till we came to my house, and then Mr. 
Glover's, John Hitchcock's, and Goodman Stewart's burnt down with barns, corn and 
all they had. A few standing about the meeting house, and then from Merrick downwards 
all burnt except two garrison houses at the lower end of the town; my grist mill and corn 
mill burnt down, with some other houses and barns I had let out to tenants. All Mr. 
Glover's library burnt with all his corn, so that he hath none to live on, as well as myself 
and many more. They tell me 32 houses and the barns belonging to them, are burnt and 
all the livelihood of the owners. The Lord shew mercy to us. Sir, I pray acquaint our 
Honored Governor with this dispensation of God. I know not how to write. The Lord 
in mercy speak to my heart and to all our hearts is the real desire of, 

Yours to serve, 


"I pray send down by the post my doublet, coat, linen and papers, I left there." 
[Then follow 60 lines in characters or short hand.] 

Letter from Rev. John Russell of Hadley to the Governor and Council, not dated, 
but written at Hadley, Oct. 6, 1675. — Extracts. 

"Right Worshipful, 

The light of another day hath turned our yesterday's fears into certainties and bitter 
lamentation for the distresses and calamities of our brethren and friends at Springfield 
whose habitations have now become an heap. The enclosed from the Honored Major 
will give you such account of it as is with us to make. We have little more to add, only 
that the houses standing are about 13. Two men and one woman slain, viz. Lt. Cooper 
who was going towards the fort to treat with the Indians that the day before professed 
great friendship, being with 3 or 4 more just about a quarter of a mile out of town, was 
shot so as he fell off his horse, but got up again and rode to the end of the town, where 
he was shot again and died. The other man was Thomas Miller of Springfield. There 
appeared not according to their estimate above 100 Indians, of whom their own were the 
chief.* Their old sachem Wequogon (in whom as much confidence was put as in any of 
their Indians) was ring-leader in word and deed. Another of their principal men cried 
out to them and told them he was one that burnt Quabaug, and now would make them 
like to it. They were gone ere Major Pynchon came in with his forces which was about 
2 or 3 of the clock. They signified their sense of his approach by their whoops and watch- 
words and were presently gone. Maj. Treat was got down from Westfield, some hours 

*The information in these lines from Mr. Russell derived from Springfield people, 
proves beyond a doubt the falsity of the rumors about Philip's Indians being at Springfield. 
Wequogon and the Springfield Indians could form daring plots, and execute them. A few 
other Indians may have assisted them, but Wequogon was "ring-leader in word and deed." 
The three and five hundred Indians of the rumors are here, on good authority, reduced 
to a hundred or less. 


sooner on the west side of the river, whose coming being perceived, 5 men went out of town, 
and although pursued by 20 Indians, carried over a boat which was filled with men, but 
the Indians standing on the river's bank shot at them and shot one through the neck (who 
is not like to recover.) They durst not adventure to pass the river, till Maj. Pynchon was 
come in and the Indians gone. Our army had prepared all things in readiness to go forth 
on Monday at night, (which was the occasion of calling forth those from Springfield) against 
a considerable party discovered 5 or 6 miles from Hadley. But the three alarms we met 
with and the tidings from Springfield wholly dissappointed it. 

Our town of Hadley is now like to drink next (if mercy prevent not) of this bitter cup; 
we are but about 50 families and now left solitary. We desire to repose our confidence in 
the eternal and living God who is the refuge of his people, and to stand ready to do and 
suffer his will in all things. To his grace I commend you. 

Your wor'ps humbly in all service, 


Our wounded men are greatly distressed for want of medicines. Those by sea not yet 
come at us; those expected by Capt. Waite left at Roxbury." 

Letter from Major John Pynchon to Governor Leverett, — Extracts. 

Springfield, Oct. 8, 1675. 
"Honored sir, 

I desired Mr. Russell to give you an account of the sore stroke upon poor distressed 
Springfield, which I hope will excuse my late doing of it. On the 4th of October our 
soldiers which were at Springfield I had called all off, leaving none to secure the town be- 
cause the Commissioners' order was so strict. That night a post was sent to us that 500 
Indians were about Springfield intending to destroy it the ^th of October. With about 200 
of our soldiers I marched down to Springfield where we found all in flames, about 30 dwell- 
ing houses burnt down and 24 or 25 barns, my corn mill, saw mill and other buildings.* 
Generally men's hay and corn are burnt and many men whose houses stand had their goods 
burnt in other houses which they had carried them to. Lt. Cooper and two more slain 
and 4 persons wounded.f That the town did not utterly perish is cause of great thank- 
fulness. As soon as said forces appeared the Indians all drew off, so that we saw none 
of them. We sent out scouts that night and the next day but discovered none. Our 
endeavors here are to secure the houses and corn that are left. Our people are under great 
discouragement and talk of leaving the place. We need your orders and directions about 
it. How to have provisions, I mean bread, for want of a mill, is difficult. The soldiers 
here already complain on that account, although we have flesh enough. Many of the in- 
habitants have no houses, which fills and throngs up every room of those that have, together 
with the soldiers; indeed it is very uncomfortable living here. But I resolve to attend 
what God calls me to and to stick to it as long as I can. I hope God will make up in him- 
self what is wanting in the creature, to me, and to us all. 

To speak my thoughts — all these towns ought to be garrisoned, as I have formerly 
hinted. To go out after the Indians in the swamps and thickets is to hazard all our men, 
unless we know where they keep; which is altogether unknown to us. 

I remain your unworthy serv't, 


We are in great hazard, if we do but stir out for wood, to be shot down by some skulking 
Indians. Mr. Glover had all his books burnt; not so much as a bible saved — a great loss, 
for he had some choice books and many." 

*Capt. Appleton states in a letter of Oct. 12, that about 33 houses and 25 barns were 
burnt, and about 15 houses left unburnt, in the town-plat. On the west side of the river, 
and in the outskirts on the east side, about 60 houses were standing, and much corn in and 
about them. 

■j-Those killed at Springfield, Oct. 5, were Lieut. Thomas Cooper, Thomas Miller, and 
Pentecost Matthews, wife of John Matthews. Those mortally wounded were Nathaniel 
Browne, and Edmund Pringridays. These died a few days after. 


Connecticut sent up forty-three Indians from Farmington, 
Hartford and Wethersfield, Oct. 6, but they effected nothing. 
On the 8th, upon a report that there were hostile Indians* near 
Hartford, Major Treat and a part of his soldiers were recalled. 
He returned to Hampshire about ten days after. 

Capt. Appleton took the command of the forces, and came 
from Springfield to Hadley, Oct. I2th.f He intended to March 
up to Squakeag on the 15th, but reports that the Indians were 
above Hatfield, drew him and his troops to that side pf the river 
on the 15th, and again on the i6th. In a letter of the 17th, he 
says, "we have wearied ourselves with a tedious night and morn- 
ing's march, without making any discovery of the enemy." 

The Springfield Squaw. — Capt. Appleton, in a letter to Gov. 
Leverett, dated at Hadley, Oct. 16, relates that a letter from 
Major Pynchon informs him of an old Indian squaw, taken at 
Springfield, who tells that the Indians who came to Springfield 
were 270; and that the enemy in all are 600. They keep at 
Coasset,! a place supposed to be about 50 miles above Hadley. 

Capt. Mosely wrote a letter to the governor from Hatfield, 
the same day, Oct. 16, of which the following is the concluding 
part : — 

"We are told by an Indian that was taken at Springfield, that the Indians intend to set 
upon these three towns in one day, The body that waits to do this exploit is about 600 
Indians, as we are informed by the aforesaid Indian; and further we are informed that they 
are making a fort some 60 miles above this place, up in the woods. 

Pray sir, be pleased to present my humble service to your lady, and all the rest of your 
family. I make no question but the enemy will make an attempt within a short time upon 
these towns. Having nothing else worthy of your reading, I remain sir, 

Your most humble and ready servant, 


Capt. Mosely wrote on the margin of this letter: — "This afore- 
said Indian was ordered to be tourne in peeces by dogs, and shee 
was so dealt withall." 

*Soon after, there was a rumor that Philip with 400 men was to fall upon Norwich, 
Oct. 15, and soldiers were ordered to that place. Men were strangely deluded respecting 

■j-Capt. Appleton reckoned the distance from Springfield to Hadley, "near 30 miles." 
In judging of distances in the woods, the miles of most men were too many. 

Capt. Appleton, in his letter of Oct. 12, trusted that by the prayers of God's people, 
"our Israel may in his time, prevail against this cursed Amalek; against whom I believe 
the Lord will have war forever, until he have destroyed him." 

JCowas was the Indian name of a pine tree, and there were several pine regions, or 
Cowassets, near Connecticut River. The one here mentioned may have been in the pres- 
ent town of Vernon, Vermont, or a little above. 


Here is a short record of a most cruel and barbarous deed — 
"ordered" too by the English, and done within the good old 
county of Hampshire, on the lovely border of the Connecticut, 
among civilized and Christian people. 

The squaw, whose story Capt. Appleton derived from Major 
Pynchon's letter, is unquestionably the same that is noticed by 
Capt. Mosely. When, where, and by whose order, this savage 
and brutal act was performed, we are left to conjecture. Her 
crime is not mentioned. 

War is always horrid; and deeds unusually atrocious done by 
one party, too often provoke the other to acts equally outrageous. 
The excessive cruelty and atrocity of the Indians, their burnings, 
massacres and tortures, exasperated the English and sometimes 
led Christian men to act like merciless barbarians.* 

On Tuesday, the 19th of October, the onset which had been 
apprehended, fell upon Hatfield. No letters relative to this 
attack have been preserved. The following account is from 

"The enemy growing very confident by the late successes, came with all their fury the 
19th of October upon Hatfield, hoping no less than to do the like mischief to them, they had 
newly done to Springfield: But according to the good providence of Almighty God, Major 
Treat was newly returned to North-Hampton, Captain Mosely and Captain Poole were 
then garrisoning the said Hatfield, and Capt. Appleton for the like end quartering at Hadley, 
when on a sudden 7 or 800 of the enemy came upon the town in all quarters, having first 
killed or taken two or three of the scouts belonging to the town, and seven more belonging 
to Capt. Mosely's company: But they were so well entertained on all hands where they 
attempted to break in upon the town, that they found it too hot for them. Major Appleton 
with great courage defending one end of the town, and Capt. Mosely as stoutly 
maintaining the middle, and Capt. Poole the other end; that they were by the resolution 
of the English instantly beaten off, without doing much harm. Capt. Appleton's Serjeant 
was mortally wounded just by his side, another bullet passing through his own hair, by 
that whisper telling him that death was very near, but did him no other harm. Night 
coming on, it could not be discerned what loss the enemy sustained, divers were seen to 
fall, some run through a small river, others cast their guns into the water, it being their 
manner to venture as much to recover the dead bodies of their friends, as to defend them 
when alive. 

At last after the burning of some few barns, with some other buildings, the enemy hasted 
away as fast as they came on, leaving the English to bless God who had so mercifully de- 
livered them from the fury of their merciless foes." 

The Letters from a Merchant of Boston to his friend in London, 
give more particulars of the loss of the scouts. The Indians made 
great fires north of Hatfield, to attract the English, and then 
came and lay in the bushes by the wayside, about two miles 

*A man in Windsor, in a letter to Boston, Oct. ai, 1675, expressed an opinion, that "if 
an Indian worthy of death, were baited by our fiercest dogs, it would be a terror!" He 
may have supposed that the dogs would thus be excited to hunt and attack Indians. He 
made no allusion to any such baiting in Hampshire county. 


from the village. About noon, ten horsemen were sent out to 
scout, and as they were passing the Indians in ambush, nine 
were shot down and one escaped to Hatfield.* The Indians 
came in, and attempted to burn the village, about four o'clock. 

The great body of the Indians withdrew from this part of the 
country after their defeat at Hatfield, Oct. 19. A few straggling 
Indians remained and did some mischief. They burnt four or 
five houses and two or three barns in Northampton, in the out- 
skirts of the town, the latter part of October; and soon after, on 
the 29th of the same month, they killed Joseph Baker, his son 
Joseph, and Thomas Salmon who were at work in a meadow. f 
The Indians intended to burn Northampton mill, but it was too 
well guarded. On the 27th of October, the Indians killed three 
Springfield men, in Westfield, viz., John Dumbleton, Jr., who 
went to the Westfield mill, and William Brooks, Jr. and John 
Brooks, who went to Westfield to look for iron ore; they also 
burnt two houses and one barn in Westfield. 

On the 30th of October at night, messengers from Hatfield 
informed Capt. Appleton that many tracks of Indians had been 
discovered, and that their cattle came running violently into 
town. He went over, and on the first of November, "went about 
10 or 12 miles into the woods, searching the chestnut mountains, 
where the enemy was thought to be, but found him not." On 
the 4th of November, Capt. Appleton and Major Treat ranged 
the woods towards Deerfield, but discovered no Indians. The 
next day, they searched the woods about Northampton, and 
found no enemy. The Indians had almost taken a man and boy 
in Northampton meadow. 

Captain Appleton, finding that some people had deserted these 
towns, and that others talked of jeaving them, issued his procla- 

*It was supposed for some months, that the nine missing scouts were all slain, but two 
of them were taken towards Albany, and were redeemed by some gentlemen at Albany, 
and arrived at New York, Feb. 25, 1676. They related that nine scouts [they had forgotten 
one] were sent out from Hatfield and that in passing a swamp, the Indians who lay hid, 
killed five, and took three, and one escaped. The Indians afterwards killed one of the 
three, having cut a hole below his stomach and pulled out his bowels. One of the two 
belonged to Boston. — [Letter from New York in the Connecticut Archives.] 

Mr. Russell's list contains the names of ten persons slain at Hatfield on the 19th of 
October, viz., Freegrace Norton, Capt. Appleton's sergeant, who was mortally wounded 
in the fight and died at the house of Lieut. Samuel Smith in Hadley soon after; and nine 
scouts, viz., Thomas Meekins, Jr. of Hatfield, Nathaniel Collins, servant of Thomas Meek- 
ins; Richard Stone, Samuel Clarke, John Pocock, Thomas Warner, Abram Quiddington, 
William Olverton, John Petts. The two taken and not slain are included. 

•j-John Roberts, a wounded soldier, died in Northampton, soon after the Bakers and 
Salmon were killed, and Mr. Russell places him with them. 


ation from his head-quarters at Hadley, Nov. 12, 1675, to the 
inhabitants of Springfield, Westfield, Northampton, Hadley and 
Hatfield, ordering "that no person shall remove from or desert 
any of these towns, so long as forces are continued here for their 
defence, without liberty under the hand of the commander in 
chief; nor shall any go out of the towns without a pass under the 
hand of the commander in chief." 

Major Treat and the Connecticut troops went homeward Nov. 
19, and Capt. Appleton departed four or five days after. Many 
of the soldiers from both colonies were dragoons with long arms, 
and their horses were kept in the Hampshire towns. Capt. 
Appleton left a small garrison in each of the five Hampshire 
towns, viz., 39 men at Springfield, to be commanded by Maj. 
Pynchon; 29 at Westfield, under Capt. Aaron Cooke; 26 at 
Northampton, under Lieut. William Clarke; 30 at Hadley, under 
Capt. Jonathan Poole; and 36 at Hatfield, under Lieut. William 
Allis. He appointed a Council of War for the security of these 
three towns, consisting of the commission oflacers of Northamp- 
ton, Hadley and Hatfield, Lieut. David Wilton of Northampton, 
Deac. Peter Tilton of Hadley, and Serg. Isaac Graves of Hatfield; 
Capt. Jonathan Poole to be president of the said Council. 

Capt. Appleton was a brave and active officer, but he was 
beset with difficulties. 

Almost all the force of the enemy was directed against this 
county from Sept. i to Oct. 19. The villages were all open to 
attacks, no palisade having been erected around any of them. 
The buildings called garrison houses were but slightly fortified. 
The soldiers were unused to war, and their trainings and Euro- 
pean military exercises were of little avail in Indian warfare. It is 
not marvellous that the Indians did so much damage. The 
number of men slain in Hampshire county in 1675, according to 
Mr. Russell's report, was 145. Of these, about 43 or 44 were 
inhabitants of the county, and above 100 were from other towns 
in the colony. Men from most of the towns in Massacuhsetts, 
moistened the soil of Hampshire with their blood. More Eng- 
lish than Indians were killed in 1675. Only one English female 
was slain in Hampshire, and no child, in that year. The 145* 
men were slain at the following times and places: — 

♦Coffin's History of Newbury has all the names that Mr. Russell gives. Some of them 
differ a little from those on the preceding pages. 


At Brookfield, 

August 2, 


At Northampton, Sept. 



Above Hatfield, 

" 25» 


At Springfield, Oct. 



At Deerfield, 

Sept. I and after, 


At Hatfield, 



At Northfield, 



At Westfield, 



Near Northfield, 



At Northampton, " 



At Muddy Brook, 

" i8, 


And of Capt. Mosely's 


" i8, 



Mr. Russell's list includes three that -were captives, and not slain, but does not include 
the woman slain at Springfield. 

At the end of Mr. Russell's return of the slain, he added the following verses from the 
2d chapter of Joel: — 

"Blow the trumpet in Zion, sanctify a fast, call a solemn assembly, gather the people? 
sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children and those that suck the 
breasts. Let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep between the porch and the altar, 
and let them say, spare thy people, O Lord, and give not thy heritage to reproach, that the 
heathen should rule over them. Wherefore should they say among the people, where is 
their God ? Then will the Lord be jealous for his land and pity his people." 

Not a little of the destruction upon Connecticut River was the 
work of the Deerfield, Hadley and Northampton, and Springfield 
Indians. These tribes may have had near 150 fighting men, and 
perhaps some of the Waranokes, or Westfield Indians, were with 
them. The manuscript accounts and printed histories of this 
war, are silent respecting the conduct and fate of the Waranoke 
Indians. It is not known that Westfield was injured by them. 
That village, though apparently much exposed to attack, was not 
assailed by any considerable body of Indians. The damage 
which they received was from small parties. It may be con- 
jectured that some of the Waranokes joined the Springfield 
Indians, and it is believed that a number of them removed, after 
the commencement of the war, to the vicinity of Hudson's River. 

The Indian warriors in and about Hampshire county, were not 
more than six hundred at any time, and most of them were Nip- 
mucks. The war was commenced by Philip's young men, but 
in this county it was not Philip's war; it was the Nipmuck war. 

The people of Hampshire generally passed a quiet but rather 
gloomy winter. The thoughts of the past and the apprehensions 
for the future, gave them heavy hearts. They however escaped 
the sufferings and afflictions of other parts of New England, 
occasioned by the Narraganset war, undertaken in the midst of 
winter. In December and most of January, the cold was severe 
and the snow deep. In January, the snow was "mid-thigh deep," 
north of Brookfield.* There seems to have been no direct com- 
munication between the Hampshire towns and Boston during 
the winter. The deep snow, the destruction of Brookfield, and 

*James Quannapohit's Relation. — There was a great thaw the latter part of January. 


especially the fear of Indians, stopped all traveling in that direc- 
tion. Sergeant John Ayres no longer remained to greet the weary 
traveler at his rustic but comfortable ordinary, on the hill in 
Brookfield. Hartford had intercourse with Boston through the 
Narraganset country, where the troops were. 

Though some families had removed, most of the dwelling- 
houses were crowded in all those villages. Many houses had 
been destroyed besides those at Springfield. Every town had to 
entertain soldiers, and the upper villages had families from Deer- 
field, Northfield and Brookfield. The people of Hampshire 
were able to supply all with food. 


Indian war of 1675 and 1676 — chiefly 1676 — Fortifications — Indians in the winter — War 
with the Narragansets — Destruction of Lancaster — Mrs. Rowlandson taken — Troops 
march to Miller's River and thence to Hadley — Northampton assaulted — Ambuscade 
near Longmeadow — Three men slain at Hockanum — Scheme to bring the five Hamp- 
shire towns into one — The Falls fight, above Deerfield — Attack on Hatfield — Major 
Talcott arrives from Norwich and Quabaug — Hadley assaulted — Expedition of Major 
Talcott and Capt. Henchman up the river — Indians flee to the Housatonnuc and are 
defeated by Major Talcott — War supposed to be at an end — Persons killed and cap- 
tured at Hatfield and Deerfield in 1677 — Recovery of the captives. 

Fortifications. — In the latter part of autumn and in the en- 
suing winter, the people of Hampshire constructed about their 
plantations, a palisade or palisado. It consisted of rows of pales, 
stakes or posts about ten feet in length, having two feet in the 
ground and eight feet above the ground.* These posts were 
made by splitting sticks of timber into two or more pieces, and 
hewing off the edges of the cleft-pieces so that no part should be 
less than two or three inches in thickness. These were set close 
together in the earth, and were probably fastened to a piece of 
wood near the top. Many of the rails of fences were used for 

*Such were the directions of the town of Hadley when the east side fortification was 
rebuilt, in 1679. Possibly the palisades of 1676 were not of the same height. Hubbard 
says the cleft wood of the palisades was about eight feet long; meaning, I suppose, the 
part above the surface of the earth. There was something called a breast -work in Hadley 
in 1676 and 1677, and men were to maintain the said breast-work "five feet and a half in 
height, with the pales or out-works thereto." Flankers are mentioned in 1678. 


palisades. These fortifications which would have been a very 
inadequate defense against an attack by Europeans, were a 
sufficient barrier against the assaults of the Indians. Hubbard 
says, "although they did in the spring break through the palisades 
at Northampton, yet as soon as they began to be repulsed, they 
saw themselves like wolves in a pound, that they could not fly 
away at their pleasure, so as they never adventured to break 
through afterward upon any of the towns so secured." 

The first vote of Hadley as a town, relating to the fortification, 
was on the nth of February, 1676. It was not then completed. 
It was a palisade fence crossing the homelots, in the rear of the 
buildings, on both sides of the street and crossing the street some 
rods from each end. The two sides of the palisade were each 
almost a mile in length and the two ends near forty rods each. 
There were strong gates at the ends, and at the highways on the 
sides. There was little danger of an attack on the western or 
meadow side of the street, and the fortification on that side was 
not so strongly made as the other. Men might not make outlets 
for themselves or cattle through the palisade. Each man, in 
order to get upon his own homelot, was under the necessity of 
going round through a gate, and then crossing other lots until he 
came to his own, or passing round still farther, to the rear of his 
lot. — Four or five houses at the north end, on the street running 
north-easterly, were not included in the fortification; and also 
apparently the house belonging to John Russell, senior, at the 
south end on the east side. 

The town was divided into three or four "squadrons," in refer- 
ence to the military watch and other matters. Each squadron 
had one or two commanders. There was also a fortification 

Feb. 1 1, 1676. The town voted that the passage to Fort Mead- 
ow and that to the corn-mill should be cleared of all brush and 
bushes, that passing to each place might be as secure as possible. 
All were to work according to their heads and estates. They 
also voted that every houselot should be cleared of all brush and 
bushes which might harbor an enemy, by the 19th instant. 

A large body of the Indians wintered near Ware River, north 
of Brookfield; others on the west side of the Connecticut, above 
Northfield, and some, including Philip, in the vicinity of Hoosac 
River, north-east of Albany. A few may have retired to the Nar- 
raganset country. 

Philip and Sancumachu and some of their Indians, were north- 
erly of Albany in December. Gov. Andros wrote from New 


York to Connecticut, Jan. 6, 1676, that Philip and 4 or 500 north 
Indians* were come within 40 or 50 miles of Albany, northerly. 
The Council of Connecticut desired Gov. Andros to stir up the 
Mohawks against these Indians; and to restrain the Dutch, who 
sold arms and ammunition to the enemy.f Gov. Andros made an 
uncourteous reply, Jan. 20, suggesting that they wished to involve 
him in a war with this "bloody crew." 

James Quannapohit,| a Christian Natick Indian, who was sent 
forth as a spy, with another named Job, arrived at Wenimesset 
or Menimesset, north of Brookfield, January 4, 1676, where he 
found, as he judged, about 300 Nipmuck fighting-men, and twice 
as many women and children. He was there informed that 
Philip was within a half day's journey of Albany; that the Spring- 
field, Hadley and Northampton Indians had their winter quarters, 
some at Squakeag, and some with Sancumachu towards Albany, 
this side of Philip. 

Philip and the other Indians left their winter quarters near the 
end of February, and returned to Connecticut River. Mrs. 
Rowlandson, on the 9th of March, 1676, crossed the river some 
miles above Northfield, and found on the west side§ "a numerous 
crew of pagans," and Philip among them. 

War with the Narragansets in Rhode Island. — The commission- 
ers of the United Colonies, on the 2d of November, 1675, deter- 
mined to carry on a war against the Narragansets, and agreed 
that a thousand men should be raised, viz., in Massachusetts, 
527, Plymouth, 158, and Connecticut, 315. This was the pro- 
portion of each colony in all this war. 

On Sunday, the 19th of December, when the weather was cold 
and the snow deep, the brave men from the three colonies took 
the formidable fort of the Narragansets, and burnt hundreds of 
their wigwams. But it was a dearly bought victory; 80 of the 
English were slain or died of their wounds, and 138 more were 
wounded. ^The Indians fought stoutly, and lost some hundreds 
of men, women and children. The confession of Indians, as to 
their loss, was as usual, a fruitful source of exaggeration. — An- 
other thousand men were ordered, and a large part of them left 

♦North Indians were Nipmucks — not half as numerous as represented. It was reported 
that Philip's own Indians were about one hundred. 

•j-The Dutch traders at Albany sold ammunition to the Hudson's River Indians, who 
purchased it for the New England Indians, and the latter in this way, obtained a supply. 

jHis Relation in the Connecticut Archives, is twice as long as that published in the 
Mass. Hist. Collections. 

§This place appears to be the Coasset, before noticed. 


Wickford on the 28th of January, and pursued the Narragansets 
north-westerly into the Nipmuck country, and killed and took 
about seventy.* — A sudden thawf carried off the snow before 
this pursuit, and the Indians procured ground-nuts for food. 

Gookin, in 1674, estimated the fighting-men of the Narragan- 
sets at one thousand. Ninigret, one of their chiefs, and his men, 
withdrew from the rest, and did not engage in the war. The 
fighting-men of the hostile Narragansets, at the close of the winter, 
may have been 400 or 500. The English had in the spring of 
1676, more open enemies than at any time in 1675, — perhaps 
1000 men, or more. 

The Nipmucks at Wenimesset informed James Quannapohit 
that they should fall upon Lancaster, Medfield, Groton, Marl- 
borough and Sudbury, and fixed upon the day to attack Lancaster. 
James left them Jan. 20, and on the 24th, his Relation was written 
at Boston. Yet his information was not sufficiently heeded, and 
these places were all attacked and almost destroyed by the Indians. 
These assaults were made when Philip was far distant, except 
the last. 

On the loth of February, the Nipmucks from Wenimesset, 
aided by some Narragansets lately come to them, assaulted Lan- 
caster, killed or captured about 42 persons, and burnt most of 
the buildings. The place was abandoned by the English in a few 
weeks. Mrs. Rowlandson,| the wife of the minister, and her 
children, were among the captives. The number of Indians in 
this expedition, according to Job, one of the Indian spies, who 
left Wenimesset after they set out for Lancaster, was about 400. § 

On the 8th of February, the Commissioners of the United Col- 
onies ordered 600 dragoons, or troopers with long firearms, to 
be raised; to rendezvous at Quabaug. || The dragoons of Mass- 
achusetts, under Major Thomas Savage of Boston, with six 
Christian Indians, and those of Connecticut under Major Treat, 
united at Quabaug, about the 2d or 3d of March; they marched to 
Wenimesset, but the Indians had information of the expedition 

*Trumbull did not know that Connecticut had in this pursuit 200 or 300 men under 
Major Treat. 

•[Mather represents a January thaw as a very strange event in those days. 

jShe pubhshed an account of her captivity and sufferings, after her return, which has 
been read by thousands of every succeeding generation. 

§Gookin, confiding in Job's estimate, says "about four hundred." Yet this number 
has been strangely increased to 1500 in later times. It has also been represented that 
Philip and his Indians were among them. A perusal of Mrs. Rowlandson's book should 
have corrected this error. 

llPlymouth soldiers were needed at home. None came from that colony into Hamp- 
shire county during the war. 


and had left the place. The dragoons pursued those that had 
gone towards Paquayag, and came to Miller's River at Paquayag, 
on the 6th of March, after the Indians had all passed over on 
rafts, and were advancing towards Squakeag. The English did 
not cross the river,* but turned and came to Hadley, where they 
arrived about the 8th of March. 

Major Savage had four companies in Hampshire, under Cap- 
tains Mosely, Whipple, Gillam and Turner. Captain William 
Turnerf came from Marlborough, Feb. 29th, with 89 foot soldiers. 
He left II men at Quabaug,]; March 4th, and came to Hadley 
with 78 men, before Major Savage arrived. He was stationed 
at Northampton. 

The expedition of the Massachusetts and Connecticut troops 
to Wenimesset and Paquayag, drove a body of Indians to Squakeag 
(Northfield,) where they came March 7th, and Mrs. Rowlandson 
with them. They went up the river some miles and crossed to 
the west side, March 9th, where were Philip§ and many Indians. 
Says Mrs. Rowlandson: — "Now the Indians gathered their forces 
to go against Northampton. Over night, one went about yelling 
and hooting to give notice of the design. Whereupon they went 
to boiling ground-nuts, and parching corn as many as had it, for 
their provision, and in the morning, away they went." They 
assailed Northampton, March 14th, were repulsed and returned 
without much booty. They evidently did not know that there 
were two or three companies of soldiers in the town. 

Extracts from letters written two days after this attack, by Major Savage and Mr. 

Hadley, March i6, 1675-6. 

Yours of the nth inst. I received. I have improved our time since we came hither in 
sending forth scouts, but as yet can make no certain discovery of any of the enemy's place 
of abode. On the 9th inst. they made an assault on some at Westfield and wounded a 
man; on the 14th instant about break of the day, the enemy fiercely assaulted Northampton 
in three places at once, and forced within their line or palisadoes, and burnt 5 houses and 5 
barns, and killed 4 men and one woman, || and wounded 6 men more; but being beaten off, 
marched towards Hatfield, and were seen in several places about the town in considerable 
companies. I presently sent another Company to strengthen that town. This morning 

♦Mrs. Rowlandson says, "God did not give them courage ojr activity to go over after 
us." She was not well qualified to judge respecting their movements. 

•{■"Capt. Turner, by trade a tailor, for his valor has left behind him an honorable mem- 
ory." — [Letters from a Boston Merchant.] He was a Baptist as was his lieutenant, Ed- 
ward Drinker, and both had suffered persecution. 

JA garrison was thus re-established at Brookfield. They found or prepared a building 
for a garrison house. Provisions for these soldiers were sent from Marlborough on horses. 
One man managed two horses, and troopers guarded the men and horses. Carts were 
sent to Lancaster, but not to Brookfield. 

§Philip treated Mrs. Rowlandson civilly, and asked her to smoke and dine. 

||Those killed were Robert Bartlett, Thomas Holton and Mary Earle of Northampton; 
and James Mackrannel and Increase Whelstone, soldiers. 


about 2 o'clock we were alarmed again from Northampton which was occasioned by some 
Indians being seen on two sides of the town. The towns both of Springfield and Westfield 
are in very great fear of the enemy as well as those here. I humbly propose to your honors, 
whether this way of following the enemy up and down in the woods will best reach your 
end at this season of the year, in which they have no certain fixed station, but can take 
advantages against us, and avoid us when they please. As near as we can gather, their 
aim is at these towns on the river, to destroy them, that so they may plant and fish with 
less molestation. I have not further to add, but to desire the good Lord to be your all in 
all and to subscribe m.yself. 

Your honors' humble servant, 


[Directed to Hon. John Leverett, Governor, with the Council.] 

Hadley, March i6, 1675-6. 
Right Worshipful, 

Although the Lord hath granted us an interval of quietness this winter, yet since the 
coming on of the spring, the war here is renewed. On the 14th inst. the enemy to the num- 
ber of 2000* as judged, made a most sudden and violent irruption upon Northampton, 
broke their works in 3 places, and had in reason taken the whole town, had not Providence 
graciously so ordered it, that Maj. Treat was come in with his men the evening before, 
yet they burnt five houses, and five barns, one within the fortification, slew five persons and 
wounded five. There are said be found slain about a dozen of the enemy.-j- Above Deer- 
field a few miles is the great place of their fishing which must be expected to afford them 
their provisions for the year. We must look to feel their utmost rage. My desire is, we 
may be willing to do or suffer, to live or die, remain in or be driven out from our habita- 
tions, as the Lord our God would have us. Capt. Poole who hath been left here for the 
government of the soldiers, doth earnestly entreat for liberty to repair to his own very 
much sufiFering family, at least for a while. With prayers to the God of all blessing to 
guide and strengthen and carry you through this day of temptation, I am, 

Sr yr worp's most obliged serv't, 


[The preceding is only a small part of a long letter to Gov. Leverett.] 

In the latter part of February and in IVIarch, small parties of 
Indians did mischief in Connecticut, and in the lower part of 
Hampshire county. They wounded William Hills of East Hart- 
ford, and killed Henry Denslow of Windsor, Edward Elmer of 
East Windsor, and John Kirby, Jr. of Middletown.| On the 
night of the 26th of March, they burnt most of the buildings in 
Simsbury, the people having left them. On the evening of 
IVIarch 30, they burnt the house of Goodman Cole in Wallingford. 

On Sunday, the 26th of March, some of the people of Long- 
meadow, men and women with children, ventured to ride to 
Springfield to attend public worship, in company with several 
colony troopers. There were 16 or 18 men in all, but some had 

*2000 Indian warriors! strange delusion! There may have been 3 or 400. 

•j-The letters from a Boston Merchant intimate that they carried off their dead. Men- 
owniet said the Indians had one killed and four wounded. 

jBancroft's remark, that "not a drop of blood was shed on the happy soil of Connecticut" 
has a few exceptions, and but a few. Besides those slain near Connecticut River, Joseph 
Rockwell and John Reynolds, Jr. of Norwich, were slain January 28, 1676, and a boy 
that had been with them could not be found. 


women behind them, and some had children in their arms, and 
when they were near Pecowsick brook, 7 or 8 Indians in the bushes 
fired upon the hindmost and killed a man and a maid, wounded 
others, and took two women with their babes, and retired into a 
swamp.* Those forward rode some distance towards Springfield, 
set down the women and maids, and then returned, but could 
not find the two women and children. A letter from Major 
Savage, dated at Hadley, March 28, 1676, gives the following 
account of this affair: — 

On the 26th inst. at night, we had advice from Springfield that 8 Indians assaulted i6 
or 1 8 men besides women and children as they were going to meeting from a place they 
call Longmeadow, and killed a man and a maid, wounded z men, and carried away captive, 
2 women and 2 children. In the night, I sent out 1 6 horse in pursuit of them, who met 
with some that were sent from Springfield, and overtook the Indians with the captives, 
who as soon as they saw the English, killed the 2 children and sorely wounded the women 
in the heads with their hatchets, and so ran away into a swamp where they could not follow 
them. The scouts brought back both the women and the children. One of the women 
remains still senseless by reason of her wounds and the other is very sensible and rational. 

The Indians told the women great stories — that there were 
3000 Indians at Deerfield, that two Dutchmen had brought four 
bushels of powder, &c. The conduct of the men in this onset 
was much censured. The Council considered it, "as a matter 
of great shame, humbling to us." Hubbard thought the matter 
had been misrepresented. One of the women recovered. 

About the same time, Pelatiah Morgan was killed on the west 
side of the river, at Springfield. "On the last snowy day" of 
the winter, probably in March, Moses Cook and a garrison soldier 
named Clement Bates, were killed in Westfield. Moses Cook 
was the only inhabitant of Westfield killed during the war. A 
house and two barns were burnt in Westfield in the winter by a 
few Indians. 

Men killed at Hockanum. — About the first of April, some in- 
habitants of Hadley went to Hockanum, to do some work, having 
a guard of soldiers with them. A party of Indians, lying in wait, 
killed Deac. Richard Goodman and two of the soldiers, and took 
Thomas Reed, another soldier.f Mrs. Rowlandson, who was 
then above Northfield, on the east side of the river, says : — "About 

*Six are said to have been slain or mortally wounded. John Keep, his wife Sarah, 
and his infant son Jabez, are three of them. The names of the others are not in the Spring- 
field record. 

j-Hubbard says Deac. Goodman went a little beyond the soldiers, to view his fence, 
and two soldiers ventured upon the top of a high hill near by, and were shot down before 
they could return to the others. Men in those days, climbed Holyoke, to take a view of 
the country. 


this time, the Indians came yelping from Hadley, having there 
killed three Englishmen, and brought one captive, Thomas 
Reed. They all gathered about the poor man, asking him many 

In the spring of 1676, many Indians congregated in the vicin- 
ity of Mount Wachuset, north-w^est of Lancaster, where the 
access to them was said to be difficult, and the obstacles in the 
way of assailants formidable. For these or other reasons, the 
English never attacked their Wachuset holds. On the first of 
April, the Council at Boston directed Major Savage to leave men 
under Capt. Turner to assist the Hampshire towns, and to return 
homewards with the rest. He left Hadley* on the 6th or 7th of 
April, with four companies under Captains Mosely, Whipple, 
and Gillam, and Lieut. Drinker. The Council at Boston had 
desired him, March 20, to visit the Wachuset quarter on his return, 
but when the troops reached Brookfield, a council was held, and 
a majority decided not to attack the Nipmucks about Wachuset. 

Major Savage left with Capt. Turner, 151 men, who were at 
the following places on the 7th of April, viz., at Hadley, 51, North- 
ampton, 46, Hatfield, 45, and 9 had been sent to Springfield. 
There were other soldiers at Springfield and Westfield. Many 
of the men left by Capt. Appleton, in the preceding November 
were still in the Hampshire towns. The Connecticut forces 
returned home two weeks or more before Maj. Savage departed. 
The troops were not sufficient to garrison the towns and go against 
the Indians up the river, and the latter were not molested until the 
19th of May. When the fishing season arrived, they came down 
and established themselves about the falls, above Deerfield; and 
they planted corn at Squakeag, and even at Deerfield, without 
being disturbed. Philip left Connecticut River at or above 
Squakeag, not far from the loth or 12th of April, and arrived at 
Wachuset about the 17th of April. He was in the same company 
with Mrs. Rowlandson, some of the way. He never again came 
to Connecticut River. The river Indians, and some Nipmucks 
and Narragansets remained. 

The Nipmucks and others about Wachuset, issuing thence, 
assaulted many places which were not assailed the preceding 
year. A large number of the Narragansets, who had been pur- 

*Mr. Samuel Nowel, the minister of the army, wrote to Major Gookin from Hadley, 
that a Hadley man, with whom the six Christian Indian guides quartered, allowed them 
pork and peas enough, but made them pay for their bread. Mr. Nowel interfered, and 
bread was allowed. This Hadley man is notTnamed. These Christian Indians, though 
true and faithful, were insulted and abused in some places. All Indians were suspected 
and hated by many. 


sued into the Nipmuck country, turned back, and the colonies 
of Plymouth and Rhode Island felt their fury. The extension 
of the war in February and March, far beyond its limits in 1675, 
the destruction of one town after another, and the difficulty of 
making any successful inroad upon the Indians, made the duties 
of the government and of the council of war extremely arduous 
and embarrassing, and some stout hearts were appalled, for a 

Plan of deserting three Hampshire towns. — The Council 
formed an injudicious scheme for the protection and security of 
the people in Hampshire. In a letter to Major Savage, March 
20, they urged the necessity of bringing the people of the five 
towns into two places. "The lesser towns, they say, must gather 
to the greater ones."* "Some that know those places best, do 
apprehend that Springfield and Hadley are the fittest places for 
fortifying and planting." "To remain in such a scattered state 
is to expose lives and estates to the merciless cruelty of the enemy." 
They wrote to Major Pynchon the same day, assuring him there 
was no other way but for all Springfield and Westfield to come 
together; "it is impossible to hold both towns." "The like advice 
we have given to the other towns, to come in all to Hadley, and 
fortify it well, and then by united strength, it may be kept, but 
otherwise all will be lost." 

The people of Northampton determined to remain in their 
own town, and boldly meet the dangers which menaced them. 
In a letter to the Council, March 28, they say 

"We dare not entertain any thought of deserting this plantation. The Lord has won- 
derfully appeared of late for our preservation, and we fear it would be displeasing unto 
him, if we should give up into the hands of our enemies, that which the Lord so eminently 
delivered out of their hands. If we should desert a town of such considerable strength, 
it may so animate the enemy, and discourage other plantations, as may prove no small 
prejudice unto the country. Besides there seems to us a great necessity for holding this 
place, for the relief of those forces that may be improved in following the enemy. There 
can be no prosecuting of the war in these parts to advantage, unless this and the two neigh- 
boring towns be maintained." 

They suggest that Springfield is not the most convenient place 
for others to repair to. "The bulk of the town is burnt, most of 
their land lies remote; they are incapable we fear either to main- 
tain themselves or others." If the Council will allow North- 
ampton 50 soldiers, besides those they had, the town will feed 
them and pay their wages. This paper is in the hand-writing of 
Mr. Stoddard, and is signed by Solomon Stoddard, John 

♦They were not apprised that this direction would carry Hadley over to Northampton. 


Strong, William Clarke, David Wilton, John Lyman and John 

The people of Westfield were decidedly and resolutely against 
a removal to Springfield, and manifested a disposition to go to 
Connecticut, if they must remove. They believed that Westfield 
was more secure from the Indians than Springfield, and much 
better for husbandry. A few extracts follow from a letter to the 
Council, dated April 3d, written by Rev. Edward Taylor, and 
signed by Isaac Phelps, David Ashley and Josiah Dewey. 

"Springfield on the east side has but few habitations left. Those on the west side are 
scattered about a mile up and down, some of which are hid with brambles. Most of its 
tillage ground is a great distance from the town, and not clear from brush; the danger of 
field employments is double to what ours is. Springfield hath been sorely under the blast- 
ing hand of God; it hath but in a lower degree than ordinary answered the labor of the 
husbandman. — To remove from habitations to none, from fortifications to none, from a 
compact place to a scattered one, from a place of less danger in the field to one of more, 
from a place under the ordinary blessing upon our labors to one usually blasted, seems 
to us such a strange thing that we find not a man amongst us inclining thereto." 

Mr. Russell, for himself and others, corresponded with the 
Council of Connecticut respecting the war, and in regard to 
drawing the three upper towns into one. The Council, April 
27, gave to him many reasons why the Hampshire towns should 
not be deserted; and they wrote the same day to the Governor and 
Council of Massachusetts, giving similar reasons. They con- 
sidered the towns up the river as "the principal granary" of 

On the 28th of March, the Connecticut Council wrote a letter 
to the Indian sachems up the river, desiring an exchange of cap- 
tives, and informing them that if they wished to treat, a mess- 
enger might come and return safely. A messenger came from 
the sachems with a writing about the first of May, and the Coun- 
cil sent back a writing, offering to give money for English cap- 
tives and proposing a meeting at Hadley within 8 days, to treat 
of peace. No reply was received from the sachems. f 

Extracts of a letter from Capt. William Turner to the Council of Mass., dated Hadley, 
April 25, 1676: 

"The soldiers here are in great distress for want of clothing, both linen and woolen. 
Some has been brought from Quabaug, but not an eighth of what we want. I beseech 
your honors that my wife may have my wages due, to supply the wants of my family. I 
should be glad if some better person might be found for this employment, for my weakness 
of body and often infirmities will hardly suffer me to do my duty as I ought; and it would 

*After AprU, I find nothing written about bringing the towns together — Hatfield was 
doubtless opposed, but no record remains. 

•{■These chiefs were Sucquance, a Narraganset sachem; Wequaquat, a Springfield sachem; 
Sungumachoe, [Sancumachu,] the Hadley and Northampton sachem; and Wanchequit. 
They were at Suckquackheag [Squakeag.] 


grieve me to neglect any thing that might be for the good of the country in this day of their 
distress.* I have sent Hsts of my soldiers at Boston and at Marlborough, and those left 
in these three towns on the 7th inst.-j- Hoping your honors will send a speedy supply for 
the soldiers, and order something for my family, I shall beg the Lord to be your counsellor 
and guide, and remain your honors' to the utmost of my power. 


There is come into Hadley a young man taken from Springfield at the beginning of last 
month, who informs that the enemy is drawing up all their forces towards these towns, 
and their head-quarters are at Deerfield."J 

On the 27th of April, Capt. Samuel Holyoke and a few men 
from Springfield, shot at four Indians near the river. Two died 
in the river as they supposed, and one was taken, who died of his 
wounds. He said the Indians had looo fighting-men up the 
river, and three forts this side of Squakeag. 

A letter dated Hadley, April 29, 1676, to the Governor and 
Council of Mass. written by Rev. John Russell, and signed by 
him, Capt. William Turner and some others of Hadley, North- 
ampton and Hatfield, (probably committees of militia) noticed 
the rising spirit of the people. 

"It is strange to see how much spirit, (more than formerly,) appears in our men to be 
out against the enemy. A great part of the inhabitants here, would our committees of 
militia but permit, would be going forth. They are daily moving for it, and would fain 
have liberty to be going forth this night. The enemy is now come so near us that we count 
we might go forth in the evening and come upon them in the darkness of the same night." 
[The going forth was three weeks later.] 

Extracts of a Letter from Rev. John Russell, to the Secretary and Council of Connecticut. 

Hadley, May 15, 1676. 
Honored Sir, 

Yours of May 5th I received on the 14th. The general visitation by sickness§ which 
you wrote of hath passed unto us also, most of our people being sorely exercised therewith: 
yet hath the Lord hitherto graciously spared lives; and likewise granted abatement of the 
violence of the disease unto most within three or four days after the first paroxysm. On 
Saturday last in the evening came in some of our messengers from Boston, signifying the 
Lord's mercy to us in granting a quiet Election in this troublous time. On the Election 

*Here was a true patriot. Some of the rulers of the country which he served so faith- 
fully, had persecuted and imprisoned him. His wife, Mary Turner, in a petition to the 
Council, for some of his pay, says her husband voluntarily and freely offered himself, and 
was then in the service of the country, with his son and servants. The Council granted 
to her £/}, April 24. William Turner, Jr. was a soldier at Hadley. 

■j-These lists of soldiers sent down by Capt. Turner, are now in the Archives of Mass- 

jThis young man was John Gilbert, aged 18, son of Thomas Gilbert of Springfield, 
deceased. Mrs. Rowlandson found him above Northfield, sick and turned out into the 
cold. She befriended him and got him to a fire. He escaped from the Indians. 

§Mather says that in April and May, "sore and (doubtless) malignant colds prevailed 
every where." He could not hear of a family in New England that wholly escaped the 
distemper. Many died. 


day, May 3d, Mr. Hoar brought in Mrs. Rowlandson to Boston.* Mr. Hoar brought 
with him a letter subscribed by Philip, the old queen and sundry Sachems, containing a 
desire of peace, or rather an overture for a cessation, if they might quietly plant at 
Mendon, Groton, Quabaug, &c. on which the court called in the Elders to advise.'j' By 
ship from England our information is that the sufferings of Non-Conformists are increased 
and the aspect of times more threatening than of late years. There hath been an engage- 
ment in the Strait between the French fleet and 40 Dutch ships. The French though 
much exceeding in number were yet much worsted and broken; many ships taken, 6000 
men slain. Peace, so much talked of between the French king and the Emperor with the 
confederates comes to nothing.^ 

This morning about sunrise came into Hatfield one Thomas Reede§ a soldier who was 
taken captive when Deacon Goodman was slain. He relates that they are now planting 
at Deerfield and have been so these three or four days or more — saith further that they 
dwell at the falls on both sides of the river — are a considerable number, yet most of them 
old men and women. He cannot judge that there are on both sides of the river above 60 
or 70 fighting-men. They are secure and scornful, boasting of great things they have done 
and will do. There is Thomas Fames his daughter and child hardly used; one or two 
belonging to Medfield and I think two children belonging to Lancaster. The night before 
last they came down to Hatfield upper meadow, and have driven away many horses and 
cattle, to the number of four score and upwards as they judge. Many of these this man 
saw in Deerfield meadow, and found the bars put up to keep them in. This being the state 
of things, we think the Lord calls us to make some trial what may be done against them 
suddenly, without further delay; and therefore the concurring resolution of men here seems 
to be to go out against them to-morrow at night so as to be with them, the Lord assist- 
ing, before break of day. We need guidance and help from heaven. We humbly beg 
your prayers, advice, and help if it may be. And therewith committing you to the guidance 
and blessing of the most High, Remain 

Your worship's in all humble service, 


Altho' this man speaks of their number as he judgeth yet they may be many more, for 
we perceive their number varies, and they are going and coming, so that there is no trust 
to his guess. 

Superscription. WILLIAM TURNER. 

"These for the worshipful John Allyn, Esq. JOHN LYMAN. 

Secretary, to be communicated to the Council ISAAC GRAVES, 
at Connecticut." 

The Falls Fight. 

After information was obtained from Thomas Reed, who es- 
caped from the Indians about the middle of May, the men of 
Hampshire and the soldiers abiding with them, determined to 

*Mrs. Rowlandson and the party of Indians with whom she lived, left a "Thicket" 
above Northfield, not far from the 9th or loth of April, and reached Wachuset about the 
17th of April. Mr. Hoar came to ransom her April 30, and she left the Indians May 2. 
Philip seems not to have been a great distance from her when she was in the Thicket; and 
he was in the same company with her when she came in sight of Wachuset. 

■j-Their advice is in Mr. Russell's letter, but is not copied here. 

|News from Europe was disseminated through the country verbally, and by letters, 
before newspapers were printed. In this case it was ssnt from Boston t9 Hadley, and 
from Hadley to Hartford. 

§It is manifest from Reed's account, that the Indians were not very numerous about 
the falls. He appears not to refer to those who were at some distance above and below 
the falls. The Indian story about 1000 fighting-men deserves not a moment's attention. 


assail the Indians at the falls* above Deerfield, with what strength 
they could raise among themselves. This expedition was a vol- 
untary effort of the people and troops residing in these towns. 
About 150 or 160 mounted men from Springfield, Westfield, 
Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield, assembled at Hatfield, May 
18, under Capt. William Turner as commander and Capt. Samuel 
Holyoke of Springfield, and Ensign John Lyman of Northampton. 
Hadley had tw^o sergeants, John Dickinson and Joseph Kellogg. 
Rev. Hope Atherton of Hatfield accompanied the troops. Ben- 
jamin Wait and Experience Hinsdale were guides. Perhaps 
about half were inhabitants of these towns; the others were soldiers 
from eastern towns, stationed in Hampshire. They commenced 
their march from Hatfield to the falls, about twenty miles, in the 
evening of Thursday, the i8thf of May. They crossed Deer- 
field and Green Rivers, and halted a little west of Fall River, 
about half a mile from the Indian camp at the head of the falls, 
and left their horses, under a small guard. They then crossed 
Fall River, climbed up an abrupt hill, and came upon the back of 
the camp, about day-break. 

"They found the Indians all asleep, without having any scouts abroad, so that our sol- 
diers came and put their guns into their wigwams, before the Indians were aware of them, 
and did make a great and notable slaughter among them." "Some got out of the wigwams 
and fought, and killed one of the English; others did enter the river to swim over from the 
English, but many were shot dead in the waters, others wounded were therein drowned, 
many got into canoes to paddle away, but the paddlers being shot, the canoes overset with 
all therein; and the stream being violent and swift near the falls, most that fell overboard 
were carried upon the falls." "Others of them creeping for shelter under the banks of the 
great river, were espied by our men and killed with their swords. Captain Holyoke kill- 
ing five, young and old, with his own hands."J 

The expedition had a calamitous issue. There were Indians 
on the opposite bank of the river, and at Smead's Island, below 
the falls. These crossed the river, and assailed the troops on 
the left and in the rear, after they had mounted their horses and 
begun their march. Capt. Holyoke covered the rear manfully, 
but "an English captive lad, who was found in the wigwams, 
spake as if Philip was coming with a thousand Indians, which 

*These falls, now called Turner's Falls, are about three miles above Greenfield village, 
and are between Gill and Montague. Before a dam was built at the falls, this was one of 
the most favorable fishing stations on the Connecticut. Hoyt, in his Antiquarian 
Researches, describes the falls, and gives a detailed account of the fight at the falls and on 
the return. 

■j-It has generally been represented that they marched on the evening of the 17th of 
May, and fought on the morning of the 1 8th. These dates are erroneous. The town 
records of Northampton and Hatfield both show that the persons from those towns who 
fell, were slain on the 19th of May. The narratives of Rev. Hope Atherton and Jonathan 
Wells indicate that the fighting was on the 19th. 

{Extracts from Mather, a Merchant of Boston, and Hubbard. 


false report being famed among the soldiers, a panic terror fell 
upon many of them, and they hasted homewards in a confused 
rout."* They separated into several parties, and some of these 
were cut off. Captain Turner had skill and courage, but he was 
enfeebled by sickness, and had not bodily strength to act with 
his accustomed energy. He was shot as he passed through Green 
River, and his body was afterwards found a small distance from 
the river; he had been shot through the thigh and back. Capt. 
Holyoke conducted the retreat of a part of the troops to Hatfield, 
being followed by the Indians to the south end of Deerfield 
Meadow. Thirty-eight of the English were slain,f and all but 
one after they left the falls. A number were wounded. In June, 
scouts found places where they supposed the Indians tortured 
and burnt some of the captured men. 

A few of the men wandered about two or three days. The 
fighting was on Friday. Jonathan Wells, of Hadley, was wounded, 
and after much sufi^ering and several narrow escapes, reached 
Hatfield on Sunday. Rev. Hope Atherton, of Hatfield, after 
roving here and there, and, as he says, "subsisting the space of 
three days and part of another, without ordinary food," came 

*The complaint of Martha Harrison, which was substantiated by testimony before the 
Commissioners of Hadley, June 22, 1676, exhibits some incidents of this disorderly flight. 
Martha Harrison of Hadley, widow, makes complaint against John Belcher of Brain- 
tree, a soldier in Capt. Turner's company, for being the culpable occasion of the death of 
her husband, Isaac Harrison, a wounded man, riding upon his own horse, who fell from 
his horse, being faint, and this John Belcher, who was behind him, rode from him with 
Harrison's horse, though he entreated him not to leave him, but for God's sake to let him 
ride with him. 

Stephen Belden of Hatfield, testified that he, riding behind Jonathan Wells, saw Isaac 
Harrison on the ground rising up, and heard him call to the man on his horse, 3 or 4 rods 
before, to take him up, saying he could ride now; the man rode away, and both Jonathan 
Wells and I called him to go back, and he would not. This was when we were returning 
from the fight at the falls. 

There is no record of Belcher's being punished. — Many had lost their horses. — Mather 
says the soldiers were more numerous than the Indians that pursued them. 

•j-Of those slain, about one-third belonged to the Hampshire towns. The eastern soldiers 
lost more than their proportion. The names of the eastern soldiers that were slain, have 
not been preserved, except those stationed in Northampton, which were recorded there, 
viz., Peter Gerrin, Thomas Roberts, John Langberry, Samuel Ransford, William Howard, 
John Foster, John Whitridge, Jacob Burton, Joseph Fowler, George Bugle (or Buckly,) 
Thomas Lyon and John Walker. James Bennet, an inhabitant of Northampton, and 
John Miller, perhaps an inhabitant, were also slain. Fourteen who went from Northamp- 
ton were slain, besides Capt. Turner whose death is recorded with the others, though he 
resided much of the time in Hadley. [The notice of James Bennet's death, on page 142, 
is an error.] 

Three Hatfield men were killed, viz., Samuel Gillet, John Church, and William Allis, Jr- 

Westfield, though not named as participating in this expedition, had in it two citizens 
and seven garrison soldiers. Of the latter, three were slain, and others wounded. 


into Hadley, on the east side of the river, about noon on 

Those in the falls-fight belonging to Hadley were Sergt. Joseph 
Kellogg, Sergt. John Dickinson, Samuel Boltwood, Noah Cole- 
man, Nehemiah Dickinson, Isaac Harrison, John Ingram, John 
Smith, Joseph Selden, Joseph Warriner, Thomas Wells, Jr., 
Jonathan Wells, David Hoyt, Samuel Crovv^, Peter Montague, 
and Eliezer Hawks; and Nathaniel SutlifFe from Deerfield. John 
Preston was one of Capt. Turner's soldiers, who went from Had- 
ley; he settled in that town. — Isaac Harrison and Nathaniel 
SutlifFe were slain, and perhaps John Dickinson and Samuel 

Mr. Russell, so often the scribe for militia officers and others 
in these three towns, wrote to Hartford as soon as the success 
and defeat were known, and desired assistance. The Council of 
War at Hartford on the 20th, ordered 80 men to be sent up to 
Northampton, under Capt. Benjamin Newberry, on Monday, 
May 22d. 

Mr. Russell and some of the militia officers of Northampton 
and Hadley, wrote again to Hartford, May 22d. 

Hadley, May 22, 1676. 
Worshipful Sir, 

Yours from the honored Council we received expressing your kind and tender care and 
love for us, with your preparation of succor and help for us with respect to such exigents 
as may prove distressing. 

Some more of our soldiers have dropped in since our last; one on Saturday, one on Sat- 
urday night, two yesterday and one this morning; and about noon Mr. Atherton came into 
Hadley. So that now the number of those wanting is eight or nine and thirty. Some 
were wandering on the west mountains on Saturday, who were not wounded. Whether 
Providence may yet guide them in or no, we know not; we are not quite without hope of 
some of them. 

As to the number of the enemy slain; many of the soldiers say they guessed them to 
be about four score that lay upon the ground. But sergeant Bardill [Bardwell] saith he 
had time and took it to run them over by tale going from wigwam to wigwam to do it, and 

*Mr. Atherton, in his relation of his sufferings and deliverances, does not tell how he 
crossed the river and got to Hadley. Approaching a party of Indians the second day, he 
says, "I tendered myself a captive. They accepted not the tender. When I spake, they 
answered not. When I moved toward them, they moved away from me." This singular 
conduct of the Indians has been attributed to their superstitious fear of an English minister, 
whom they considered a superior being. Some persons in those days, imagined that Mr. 
Atherton had been partially deranged, and had deceived himself. He did not admit this. 

j-The five towns had in the expedition, exclusive of eastern soldiers, about 75 men, and 
68 of these left posterity that had 68 shares of land in Falltown, in 1736, viz., Springfield, 
21, Northampton, 19, Hadley, 15, Hatfield, 9, Westfield, 2, and 2 had lived in Deerfield. 
A number of the soldiers settled in these towns. Four of the Hampshire men were living 
in 1736, 60 years after they fought under Turner and Holyoke, viz., Nathaniel Alexander 
of Northampton, Samuel Belden of Hatfield, Jonathan Wells of Deerfield, and James Mun 
of Colchester, Conn. Four of the eastern soldiers were also living. 


also what was between the bank and the water, and found them above an hundred. He 
hath sometimes said six score but stands to it that there were above lOO, 17 being in a wig- 
wam or two a little higher up than the rest. 

Likewise Wm. Drew, a soldier that seems to be of good behavior and credit, seeing two 
or three soldiers standing in a secure place below the bank, more quiet than he thought 
was meet for the time, he asked them why they stood there — saith they answered that they 
had seen many go down the falls and they would endeavor to tell how many. Hereupon 
he observed with them until he told fifty, and they said to him that those made up six score 
and ten. Some of them also were slain in their pursuit of ours where so many of ours fell. 
Hence we cannot but judge that there were above 200 of them slain. 

Our Scouts being out this night have discovered that the enemy abide still in the places 
where they were on both sides of the river and in the Islands, and fires in the same place 
where our men had burnt the wigwams.* So that they judge either that Philip is come to 
them, or some considerable company from Squakeag, Poquiog and other places. Here- 
upon it seems most probable, if not concludable that their purpose is to abide here, at 
least for some space of time, as having the advantage of a place best suited to shift for 
their safety, being on both sides the river, on the Islands, and their fort close by Deerfield 
River, and amidst the desolate places fit for them to skulk in and escape by. Whence we 
would humbly propose it to your consideration, whether Providence doth not offer and 
call to the accepting this opportunity and improving of it speedily before it slip, and whether 
we may not look that the taking of them here, with a smaller help of English and Indians, 
may not be likely to be a greater advantage than greater numbers when they are removed 
hence ? They have planted as is judged 300 acres-]- of choice ground at Deerfield; their 
fish is there not yet fit to carry away and their place such as they can shift almost away 
from our approach. So that we count them likely to abide awhile. 

We are by reason of our fences being all plucked upj exceedingly disadvantaged for 
keeping horses, so that we shall be necessitated either to put them in some meadow two 
or three miles off our towns, or keep them very meanly, or send them home while the riders 

Might we receive a few lines from yourself respecting the premises, it would be matter 
of direction for us. We have not further to add but hearty thanks for your care of and 
love to us, together with prayers to God of blessing for his presence with and blessing upon 
you in all your weighty proceeds. We remain. 

Your worship's in all humble service. 
Superscription. JOHN RUSSELL. 

"These for the Worshipful John Allyn, Esq. SAMUEL SMITH. 

Secretary, at his house in Hartford, to be com- DAVID WILTON, 

municated to the Hon'd Council there." AARON COOK. 

Loss of the Indians in the Falls-fight. — The reports that the 
Indians slain and drowned were about 230, or above 200, were 
evidently derived from the counts or guesses of Bardwell§ and 
Drew, and of those referred to by Drew. It can hardly be credited 
that men could have found time during or after the fight, to count 
the dead or drowning Indians. It is not unreasonable, however, 
to suppose that from 130 to 180 Indians, old and young, perished 
at the falls that morning. The extravagant confessions of some 
Indian prisoners swelled the number to 300, and even to 400. 
Other Indians, whose testimony Mather noticed, affirmed that 

*The wigwams above the falls were burnt by the English. They contained many bodies 
of the slain. 

+Probably not one-fourth of 300 acres. 

jThey used the fences that were about the homelots in these towns, to make palisades. 

§Robert Bardwell was one of Capt. Turner's soldiers, who had been in the Narragan- 
set fight. He settled in Hatfield, and was a reputable man. 


many who went down the falls, got safe on shore, and that they 
lost not above 60 men. Menowniet testified at Hartford that 40 
Norwottucks (meaning river Indians) and Quabaugs, and 10 
Narragansets, were slain at the falls. These 50 or 60 Indians 
include only fighting-men. 

If the veil be raised, which partially covers some of the horrors 
of that morning, it will be seen that those wigwams above the falls 
contained men, women and children; that the slaughter was indis- 
criminate, and that many of those carried down the falls were not 
warriors. A great part of those that perished were river Indians, 
who, twelve months before, resided near the Hampshire villages. 

The defeat of the Indians at the falls was one from which they 
never recovered. If they lost only 60 fighting-men, they lost 
more then fell in any action during the war, except in the Narra- 
ganset conflict. 

Capt. Newberry came up to Northampton with about 80 men, 
on the 22d of May. He left three at Westfield, seven of their 
men having been slain or wounded, in the late expedition. In a 
letter of the 24th, from him and John Maudsley, they proposed 
to go up the river, if the council approved. And they further 
propounded, "whether it may not be advantageous to send up 
Samuel Cross and those dogs* he hath, if you see cause to have 
any thing done." 

Attack on Hatfield. — On the 30th of May, the Indians appeared 
at Hatfield, when the men were out in the fields. Their first 
object was obviously to plunder and destroy property without the 
palisades, and one party placed themselves in the meadow near the 
ferry to Hadley, to hinder men from coming over; and later in 
the day, another party lay in ambush by the road to Northamp- 
ton. The crossing of the river from Hadley, and passing through 
the meadow to Hatfield village, was a bold adventure of the Eng- 
lish. The number of Indians may have been 250. — Mr. Russell 
wrote to Hartford the same day, but his letter is lost. An account 
from Mather, and a hasty letter from Capt. Newberry to Secre- 
tary Allyn, follow. 

"The enemy fired about twelve houses and barns without the fortification, killed many 
of their cattle, drove away almost all their sheep, and spread themselves in the meadow 

♦Dogs have been used in many countries to hunt mankind, and sometimes to tear them 
in pieces. The northern parishes of England were required to keep blood-hounds to hunt 
freebooters, in the time of Charles II. Men who run away from slavery in the United 
States, are still hunted with dogs; and some years since, it was proposed by a distinguished 
officer, to purchase blood-hounds to aid the United States troops in the war against the 
Indians in Florida. Massachusetts tried dogs against Indians, in the last century, but there is 
no record that they ever killed or captured an Indian. They are inefficient against armed men. 


between Hatfield and Hadley, Whereupon twenty-five active and resolute men went from 
Hadley to relieve their distressed brethren. The Indians shot at them ere they could get 
out of the boat, and wounded one of them. Ours nevertheless charged on the enemy, 
and shot down five or six at the first volley near the river. Then they made haste towards 
the town, fighting with a great number of the enemy, many falling before them. And 
though encompassed with a numerous swarm of Indians, who lay in ambush behind al- 
most every tree and place of advantage, yet the English lost not one man, till within about 
an hundred rods of the town, when five of ours were slain; among whom was a precious 
young man whose name was Smith, that place having lost many, in losing that one man. 
It speaketh sadly to the rising generation when such are taken away. After this the enemy 
fled, having lost five and twenty in this fight." 

Northampton, May the 30th, 1676. 
Right worshipful, 

Sir, by post from Hatfield, we received intelligence even now, that the Indians have 
done much spoil; many houses burnt without the fortification. Several men from Hadley 
went over for their relief, of which there are five killed and three wounded. Two of our 
men killed, Johanna Smith and Richard Hall; John Stow wounded in the foot, and Roger 
Orvis is also wounded in the foot. John Smith of Hadley killed and two of their garrison 
soldiers.* There were about 150 Indians that fought them up the meadow, all like to 
be killed or taken but that men issued out from the town for their relief; none slain till 
almost come up to the town. Many more Indians then were at the town doing spoil at 
the same time that our men were fought with. They drew off and ambushed the way 
betwixt Northampton and Hatfield to lay wait for our forces, but fearing it beforehand, 
they [our forces] went not that way but drew over to Hadley — could not get to Hatfield 
by reason they lay so thick about the landing-place.-j- — Many cattle and horses slain and 
taken away. That is the substance of what intelligence we have to impart. The Lord 
sanctify his hand to us for our good, and be present with you in all your weighty concerns 
under hand. Intelligence from Boston you have already. Not else but cordial respects to 
yourself and all relations with you. I take leave, remaining . 

Your humble Serv't, 


The Connecticut forces under Major Talcott. — In May, 1676, 
Massachusetts and Connecticut designed an expedition into 
Hampshire county. Their forces were to scour the country, and 
to visit Squakeag, the supposed head-quarters of the Indians. 
Major John Talcott at the head of 250 EngHsh on horses and 200 
Indians on foot from Connecticut, left Norwich on the first or 
second of June, and arrived at Hadley on the 8th. He crossed 
the river to Northampton the same day with part of his forces, 
that being usually the head-quarters of the Connecticut troops. 
They took from Norwich 4000 pounds of bread, 1300 pounds of 

*John Smith of Hadley, so highly praised by Mather, was in the falls-fight a few days 
before. He was a son of Lieut. Samuel Smith, and an ancestor of the Hatfield Smiths. 
The late Oliver Smith of Hatfield, the most wealthy man in Hampshire, was one of his 

Johanna Smith was from Farmington and Richard Hall from Middletown. The names 
of the two colony soldiers killed are unknown. None of the Hatfield people were slain. 

■[•Some of his men did get to Hatfield, or two would not have been slain, and two 


pork, 26 gallons of liquors, and other things.* Capt. Daniel 
Henchman and the Massachusetts troops were delayed, and did 
not arrive at Hadley until the 14th. 

Major Talcott intended to attack the stronghold of the Indians 
near Mount Wachuset, but he received a letter from the Council, 
written May 31st, advising him "not to march to Watchossuck," 
[Wachuset.] This place was deemed formidable by the Council 
of Connecticut. Capt. Henchman was to take Wachuset in his 
way, but he came up in haste, and Wachuset was not assailed. 

The eighth of June, 1676, was a day of much excitement in the 
river towns. An army of 450 men from Connecticut was a novel 
and animating spectacle. The inhabitants of Hadley gazed with 
eagerness upon the 250 mounted men, with their red silk banners, 
and especially upon the 200 Indians, as they marched up the 
street. The men on horses were almost all from the towns upon 
Long Island Sound, under Captains Sellick, Mansfield, and 
Denison. Most of the Hartford county troops were at North- 
ampton under Capt. Newberry. The Indians were Pequots, 
Mohegans, Nianticks, Indians from Hartford county, and some 
from Fairfield. They formed a motley assemblage; their dress 
and arms were various, and their decorations diversified and fan- 
tastic. A collection of 200 friendly Indian warriors, was a sight 
which the inhabitants of these towns never saw before. 

Extracts of ai letter from Major John Talcott, to Dep. Gov. Treat and the Council 
at Hartford. 

Northampton, June 8, 1676, 
at 10 of the clock at night. 
Hon'd Gent'm, 

In pursuance of your orders, past from Norwich to Wabaquasset, at which place 'suppose 
was about 40 acres of corn, and a fort, but none of the enemy to be found; from thence made 
Chanagongum-j' in the NinapJ country, on the 5th of June, and took 51 of the enemy, 
of which 19 slain and one shot and made an escape; and on the 6th instant made towards 
Quabaug and gained it on the 7th day about 12 oYlock; took 2 of the enemy, who were 
laden with as much fish as they could carry, and each of them a gun, their horns full of 
powder, which were taken; we sent 27 women and children to Norwich under conduct of 
some of those we call honest Indians, and the other are come to Hadley with the army. 
By the last that was slain we receive intelligence that there is 500 fighting-men at Pacomtuck. 
This eighth instant we made Hadley with about 200 Indians and 250 English, but the Bay 
forces are not come. I past away from Quabaug a letter to the chief commander of the 
Bay forces, intended for conjunction with us in these parts, and upon advice with those 
of my council of war, judge that it is not prudent to divide our forces and engage the enemy 
on both sides of the river, being too weak, rationally expecting that they will endeavor to 

*Trumbull and others are mistaken in supposing that this was the "hungry march.'" 
That march was in August. 

"j"The name of a pond and Indian village in Dudley, called Chabanakongkomun by 

{The Nipmuck country was also called Nipnet, Ninep, Ninap, &c. 


make over to one side and so overpower us, it may be to our ruin and your loss, and judge 
it a bootless undertaking to drive but one side, knowing they will fly (if beaten) over to 
the other side and scornfully reproach us. I have quartered our soldiers and are waiting 
for your further orders. Mr. Fitch, Mr. Bulldey,* Capt. Newberry, Capt. Denison with 
all other of our officers and soldiers are in health, desiring their service to be presented to 
your worships, and do acknowledge the great goodness of God in saving and preserving 
us in the midst of all our difficulties. Gent'm, if you cause any bread to be made for this 
wilderness work, it had need be well dried; great part of our bread is full of blue mold, and 
yet kept dry from wet, and we shall need a barrel of powder at this time and 300 lbs. of 
bullets for carrying on the war here as we judge. We shall endeavor to procure bread here 
for our soldiers not knowing how bread can be conveyed up. Shall not trouble you further. 
Am Hon. Gent. 

Your humble serv't, 


Please to send up those sent down for powder and bullets, with all possible speed. Re- 
member flint stones. 

Major Talcott wrote another letter from Northampton, June 
nth. Had sent posts to Capt. Henchman, to hasten the Bay 
forces, and expected their arrival on the 14th at night. "Our 
delays in these parts do so exhaust their provision, that it is feared 
they cannot suit us with bread sufficient for the field." He sent 
down 40 or 45 horses under Lieut. Leffingwell, to bring what 
bread they could from Deac. Moore, a baker in Windsor. 

Attack on Hadley. — On Monday, June 12th, the Indians ap- 
peared at Hadley, ignorant that 450 men had recently arrived in 
these towns. Major Talcott was on the west side of the river, and 
Capt. Swain, who had been sent up to take the place of Capt. 
Turner, had the command in Hadley. The object of the Indians 
seems to have been to plunder and destroy, without the fortifi- 
cation, as at Hatfield. It may be conjectured that a part of them 
designed to cut off those that went down to work in Fort and 
Hockanum meadows in the morning. There may have been 250 
Indians engaged in this enterprise. They were our river Indians 
and other Nipmucks, with some Narragansets. This was their 
last effort in the county of Hampshire in 1676. The power of 
the Indians was fast declining. The following account is from 

"June 1 2, the enemy assaulted Hadley. In the morning, sun an hour high, three soldiers 
going out of the town without their arms, were dissuaded therefrom by a sergeant who stood 
at the gate, but they alledging that they intended not to go far, were suffered to pass; with- 
in a while, the sergeant apprehended that he heard some men running, and looking over 
the fortification, he saw twenty Indians pursuing those three men, who were so terrified 
that they could not cry out; two of them were at last killed, and the other so mortally wound- 
ed that he lived not above two or three days; wherefore the sergeant gave the alarm. God 
in great mercy to these western plantations, had so ordered by his providence, that Connecti- 
cut army was come thither, before this onset from the enemy. Besides English, there were 

*Rev. James Fitch of Norwich was the minister, and Rev. Gershom Bulkley, of Weth- 
ersfield, the surgeon of the expedition. 


near upon two hundred Indians in Hadley, who came to fight with and for the English, 
against the common enemy, who was quickly driven off at the south end of the town. Whilst 
our men were pursuing of them here, on a sudden a great swarm of Indians issued out of 
the bushes and made their main assault at the north end of the town; they fired a barn 
which was without the fortification, and went into a house, where the inhabitants discharged 
a great gun* upon them, whereupon about fifty Indians were seen running out of the house 
in great haste, being terribly frighted with the report and slaughter made amongst them 
by the great gun. Ours followed the enemy, (whom they judged to be about five hundred, 
and by Indian report since, it seems they were seven hundred-j-) near upon two miles, and 
would fain have pursued them further, but they had no order so to do. But few of ours 
lost their lives in this skirmish, nor is it yet known how many the enemy lost in this fight. 
The English could find but three dead Indians, yet some of them who have been taken 
captive, confess that they had thirty men killed this day. And since we have been informed 
by Indians, that while the Indian men were thus fighting against Hadley, the Mohawks 
came upon their head-quarters, and smote their women and children, with a great slaughter, 
and then returned with much plunder."!j; 

Expedition up the river. — Capt. Henchman arrived at Hadley 
w^ith the Massachusetts troops, and a company of Christian 
Indians, on the 14th of June. On Friday, the i6th, the forces 
moved up the river, Capt. Henchman on the east side, and Major 
Talcott on the west side. There was a severe thunder shower 
that day, but they reached the falls, where they found no Indians. 
There was a north-east rain-storm all the next day, and the night 
succeeding, which damaged their arms, ammunition and provis- 
ions, and they returned to the towns on Sunday, the i8th. They 
sent up scouts, on the east side of the river, as high as Squakeag, 
who could not discover the enemy. The soldiers ranging on the 
west side, above Deerfield, found the body of Capt. Turner, and 
conjectured that they found places where some of the English 
had been tortured to death by burning. 

On the 28th of June, about 30 men went up towards the falls, 
and espied no Indians. They burnt a hundred wigwams upon 
an island, ruined an Indian fort, spoiled an abundance of fish 
which they found in Indian barns under ground, and destroyed 
30 canoes. Some of the Indians had gone eastward, and others 
might have gone up the river to their Coasset. They were dis- 
tressed and scattered. 

Major Talcott and the Connecticut forces returned to that col- 
ony, June 20th, and a fortnight after, they were killing and cap- 
turing Indians in the colony of Rhode Island. 

*It is not known when and where Hadley obtained this "great gun," which was only 
a small cannon. Lt. Walter Filer of Windsor, in a letter written in October, 1675, re- 
marks that "if the great gun at Springfield had been but mounted into Mr. Glover's cham- 
ber, it would have put the 100 Indians to rout at the top of the hill," &c. This Springfield 
cannon is not noticed by others. 

•j-In this as in other instances, the wild conjectures of the English, were less extravagant 
than the reports of the Indians. There were not at that time seven hundred hostile Indian 
warriors in Massachusetts. 

jTlie reports of the Mohawks attacking our Indians, were false. 


Capt. Henchman left Hadley the latter part of June, and he 
killed or took 84 Indians in coming up and returning. 

Before Major Talcott and Capt. Henchman left Hampshire, 
there were near 900 soldiers in the county, viz., about 530 from 
Connecticut, including Indians; and between 350 and 400 from 
the eastern towns in Massachusetts. Only the garrison soldiers 
under Capt. Swain remained. 

Wheat Harvest in Hadley. — The people were apprehensive 
that the Indians might return during the wheat harvest, and on 
the nth of July, Mr. Russell, in behalf of the people, wrote to 
Secretary Allyn at Hartford, and requested a guard of thirty 
men, while they gathered the harvest from their out-fields. Mr. 
Allyn replied on the 14th, that they could not send men to Hadley, 
as their army was to march on the 17th, and their harvest had 
just come. He thought the Indians were brought low, and would 
be lower every day. 

On the 1 8th of July, the people of Hadley adopted the following 
regulations in regard to their harvest. 

"Ordered, that during the time of cutting and inning of corn* and grass, in Hockanum and 
Fort Meadow, there shall not be less than the whole number of garrison soldiers, and two 
out of each squadron, or eight inhabitants, left to secure the town as a garrison every day; 
the ordering of the garrison aforesaid to be under the inspection of the captain of the garrison 
soldiers and Lieut. Smith. Ordered that not less than forty nor more than fifty men, pre- 
sume to go to labor in Hockanum or Fort Meadow as to harvest-work; and this number 
they shall dispose of in the best manner for their security and safety; and on those days 
when such a part are working, either in Hockanum or Fort Meadow, no person shall then 
be working in the Great Meadow, but the rest are to abide in the town as a security under 
penalty of three shillings. Tomorrow, July 19th, shall be the day for going to Hockanum, 
the 20th into the Great Meadow, the 21st into Hockanum, and so the week following." 

The meadows north of Hadley village, on account of their ex- 
posure to the enemy, were not cultivated in 1676; and the North 
Meadow in Hatfield seems not to have been used in tillage. 

Flight of Indians to Hudson's River. — In July, the Indians were 
in a disunited and depressed state. They suffered from famine 
and disease, and were hunted from place to place. Some were 
taken and others gave themselves up; most of these were women 
and children. Some fled to distant places. About the 19th of 
July, a party passed through Westfield, in their flight to Hudson's 
River. They seized some horses and cattle, and plucked up 
corn-stalks to suck for refreshment. 

Another party crossed the Connecticut between Hadley and 
Springfield on Friday, the nth of August, and passed near West- 
field the next day. Major Talcott pursued them. Major Pyn- 

*The corn was wheat. After making an allowance for the difference in style, it will 
be found that the wheat harvest at Hadley began near the end of July, and at Hartford, a 
few days sooner, in 1676. 


chon gives an account of these things in a letter to the governor 
of Massachusetts. Extracts foUow^. 

Springfield, Aug. 15, 1676. 

The body of the Indians is drawn off towards Albany, where they are harbored under the 
government of Andros. We shall be in danger of being continually disturbed, if he harbors 
the enemy. Last Saturday, August 12th, near 200 Indians were discovered within three 
or four miles of Westfield. The people and soldiers then went out and made several shots 
on them and took a horse from them, but finding them so many, they sent word to me. I 
presently gave order for thirty to march thither, but they came too late; and then also Major 
Talcott's army came in (who has, they say, cut down all the Indian corn about Quabaug, 
&c.) They pursued them on Sabbath about noon, a day after the Indians were gone, and 
provisions not being ready at Westfield, they hastened somewhat short of provisions, and I 
doubt they will not overtake them till they come to Aussotinnoag.* 

While I am writing, news comes that Major Talcott's army are most of them returned ; 
only himself and 60 men and as many Indians have gone on. Finding his want of victuals, 
Maj. Talcott sent back most of his men, taking all their victuals, and discharging himself 
of his horses. An old Indian, whom he took, told him the Indians intended to rest at Ous- 
sotinoag, and that they had between 50 and 60 fighting-men, and 100 women, besides chil- 
dren. He hopes to get up with them and do some execution, which the Lord in mercy 
grant. We find by our scouts that this parcel of Indians went over the great river on rafts 
at the foot of the great falls, between us and Hadley, and their track comes from the Nip- 
muck country. The scouts found where they lay, within seven miles of our town, having 
about 25 fires. 

My respects to your good lady and all the magistrates. 


According to Hubbard, Major Talcott overtook the Indians at 
Ausotunnoog River, and fought with them, kiUing and taking 45, 
of whom 25 were fighting-men, with the loss of only one, a Mohe- 
gan Indian. The Council of Connecticut, in a letter to Gov. 
Andros, dated Aug. 19, say theirs slew 40 and took 15 cap- 
tives. This engagement was on Tuesday morning, Aug. 15th, 
and is supposed to have taken place in or near the present town- 
ship of Sheffield. Major Talcott was not stationed at Westfield, 
as intimated by Trumbull, but had recently come from the east.f 

Major Pynchon advised Capt. Swain to send out soldiers and 
cut down the corn at Squakeag, and the work was done before 
the 15th of August,— and no Indians seen. He had also sent 30 

*The name of the Housatonnuc was so spelled by John Pynchon. It was written by 
some Housetunack, and Ousatunick, in 1676. 

•j-The third expedition of Major Talcott and his army is not mentioned by historians, 
except a slight notice by Capt. Church. They marched from New London, after the 20th 
of July, and crossed the Narraganset country into the colony of Plymouth. On the 31st of 
July, Massachusetts ordered bread, bacon, cheese, spirits, wine and tobacco, to be sent to 
Taunton, for Major Talcott's forces. As Major Talcott was returning, he was apprised of 
the fleeing of the Indians and pursued them. Old Col. Wadsworth of Durham informed 
Pres. Stiles that this was the hungry march; he had a manuscript history of it. The proc- 
lamation of Connecticut of Aug. 19th, appointing Aug. 30th as a day of Thanksgiving, 
noticed "the goodness of God to us in the great preservation he hath mercifully granted our 
men, in their last, long, and tedious march through the wilderness," &c. This was the 
" long and hungry march," — from near Taunton River to the Housatonnuc. 


men to Paquayag upon Miller's River, to cut down the corn there. 
On the 22d, the soldiers finished cutting down the corn at Deer- 
field; they saw six Indians near Deerfield River. Capt. Swain 
had orders to march homewards, and intended to go on the last 
day of August, but a part of the men remained a few days longer.* 
The soldiers had been in service many months; some were left 
by Capt. Appleton in November, 1675, and others came up with 
Capt. Turner in March, 1676. Some had formed attachments 
here, and became permanent residents. 

Philip was slain on the 12th of August, 1676, at Mount Hope, 
by an Indian of his own nation. The hostile Indians had fled, 
or submitted, and the war appeared to be terminated, except in 
Maine. The people of Hampshire were afraid that those fugi- 
tives who had been received by the Hudson's River Indians, 
would make inroads upon their towns; and requests were made to 
Gov. Andros to deliver up some of the chiefs. He, not improp- 
erly, refused to do this. In April, 1677, the names of the prin- 
cipal men, supposed to be in New York, were sent to Gov. Andros, 
viz., Wequogan, Awassamaug, Pumanequin, Negonump, Ape- 
quanas alias John Sagamore, and Cochapesen. The first and 
the last were Springfield Indians. Gov. Andros said some of the 
Indians had "fled to Canada, some to the Senecas, and most 
other nations have got some." Our Norwottuck chief Sancum- 
achu, was not named. 

King Philip. — He was the terror of New England for fourteen 
months. Schemes were attributed to him which he did not con- 
trive, and deeds which he did not perform; and he was charged 
with the atrocities and cruelties of others. He was not in the 
attacks upon the Hampshire villages in 1676; he was not con- 
cerned in the slaughters and desolations at Lancaster, Medfield, 
Plymouth, Groton, Warwick, Marlborough, Rehoboth, Provi- 
dence, Chelmsford, and other places which might be named. But 
Philip was a savage and doubtless rejoiced in the havoc and blood- 
shed made by the fierce and furious Nipmucks and Narragan- 
sets.f Philip had but few followers and obeyers. He is said to 
have quarrelled with the Nipmucks at Wachuset. 

The Mohawks. — In 1676, various delusive reports were circu- 
lated in New England, relating to what the Mohawks had done or 

*On the 1 8th of August, the Connecticut captains were ordered to march to their respec- 
tive counties and disband their companies. The war was considered at an end. 

■[■The story published in some histories, that when Philip was near Albany, he killed 
some scattered Mohawks, and reported that the English had done it, in order to breed a 
quarrel between the English and Mohawks, does not deserve the least credit. 


would do, against the hostile Indians, and they are found in the 
letters and histories of that day. Some of these came from New 
York and Albany, and from Gov. Andros himself, and some were 
derived from the "confessions" of Indian captives. No reliance 
can be placed on these reports and hearsays. There is no evi- 
dence that the Mohawks came into New England and killed any 
hostile Indians. The Council of Connecticut wrote to Gov. 
Andros, Aug. 31, that they were in the dark, as to the Mohawks 
pursuing and destroying our Indians; they knew not what ser- 
vices the Mohawks had done. (See page 123.) Possibly they 
had cut off a few stragglers. 

Hatfield attacked in 1677. 

On the 19th of September, 1677, a year after the war was appar- 
ently closed, some Indians made an unexpected and destructive 
inroad upon Hatfield. About eleven o'clock in the forenoon, 
when a greater part of the men were dispersed in the meadows, 
and others were employed upon the frame of a house without the 
palisades, a party of Indians suddenly assaulted the latter, and 
shot down three men, and proceeding to other buildings, killed 
nine more persons, wounded four others, took seventeen captives, 
and burnt seven buildings. This was a more calamitous assault 
than had been made upon any town in Hampshire during the 
two preceding years. All the persons killed, wounded and taken 
were women and children except five. All these women and 
children lived in the northern part of the village, and probably 
without the palisade.* 

The Indians proceeded with their captives to Deerfield the 
same day, where a few people were preparing to rebuild their 
houses; of these they killed one and captured four.f They 
resumed their march up the Connecticut with twenty-one cap- 
tives, the next morning, and they stopped on the east side of the 
river, about thirty miles above Northfield,t where they built a 
long wigwam, and remained about three weeks. 

They were pursued as far as Northfield, but not overtaken. 
To aid in the pursuit, Connecticut sent up Capt. Thomas Watts 
with 50 men. Had they come upon the Indians, the prisoners 
would have been in danger of the tomahawk. 

*Gookin says the buildings burnt stood without the line. 

•j-One of these Deerfield captives was Quintin Stockwell, and in 1684, Rev. Increase 
Mather published a Narrative of his Captivity, from his own words. 

jThis distance is Stockwell's guess. Their stopping-place may have been 15 or lo miles 
above Northfield. 


During the three weeks' stay of the Indians above Northfield, 
some of them proceeded to Wachuset, and brought back with 
them about eighty women and children. Benoni Stebbins, who 
was taken at Deerfield, going with them towards Wachuset, 
escaped, and returned to his friends. Others of these Indians 
came down and there was a parley* between them and the Eng- 
lish, and it was agreed to meet again on the Sabbath, Oct. 14th, 
to make a treaty for the redemption of the captives. Hadley, 
Hatfield and Northampton sent down to Hartford for assistance 
in case of an attack, and for a suitable person to advise. The 
General Court of Connecticut, on the nth, sent up Major Treat 
with 40 men to give assistance if needed. The endeavors of 
these towns and of Connecticut, to ransom the prisoners, were 
frustrated, and the Indians did not attend the meeting on the 

Benoni Stebbins reported that the Indians who had been at 
Hatfield were about twenty-seven, including four women, and 
that they were of the old enemy, formerly neighbors, who had 
fled to Canada. Stockwell calls a part of them Wachuset Indians. 

The Hadley mill which had been preserved by a small garrison 
in 1675 and 1676, was burnt by Indians in October, 1677. The 
Hadley record does not note the day. 

Sometime in October, the captors and the captives again moved 
up the river. They crossed the country to Lake Champlain, and 
after some delays, arrived in Canada in winter weather. These 
sufferers from Hatfield and Deerfield, were the first that were 
ever forced to leave their homes in New England, and travel 
through the dreary wilderness, to Canada. Hundreds were after- 
wards compelled to do the same. 

The persons killed, taken and wounded, at Hatfield, Sept. 19, 1677, were as follows: — 

Killed. — Sergt. Isaac Graves and his brother, John Graves; John Atchisson; John 
Cooper of Springfield, aged 18; Elizabeth, wife of Philip Russell and her son Stephen, aged 
3 years; Hannah, wife of John Coleman, and her babe Bethiah; Sarah, wife of Samuel 
Kellogg, and her babe Joseph; Mary, wife of Samuel Belding; Elizabeth Wells, aged two 
years, daughter of John Wells; in all, 12. 

Taken. — Sarah Coleman, aged four years, and another child of John Coleman; Martha, 
wife of Benjamin Wait, and her 3 daughters, Mary, aged 6, Martha, 4, and Sarah, 2; 
Mary, wife of Samuel Foote, and a young son, and daughter Mary, aged 3; Hannah, wife 
of Stephen Jennings, and two of his children by a previous wife; Obadiah Dickinson and 
one child; Samuel, son of Samuel Kellogg, aged 8; Abigail, daughter of John Allis, aged 6; 
Abigail, daughter of William Bartholomew, who lived at Deerfield before the war; in all, 17. 

Wounded. — A child of John Coleman; wife and daughter of John Wells; wife of Oba- 
diah Dickinson. 

♦Hubbard reports that the Indians attempted to take Hadley mUl, and missing their end, 
pretended a kind of parley. 


Buildings burnt. — John Coleman's barn; John AlHs's barn; Obadiah Dickinson's house; 
Benjamin Wait's house and barn; Samuel Kellogg's house and barn. 

At Deerfield. — John Root was taken and then killed; and Sergt. John Plympton, senior, 
Quintin Stockwell, Benoni Stebbins, and Samuel, son of Philip Russell, aged 8 or 9, were 

At both places, there were 13 killed and 21 taken. After the escape of Benoni Stebbins, 
the captives were 20. Of these, three were slain in Canada, viz., Sergt. Plympton, Samuel 
Russell, and Mary, daughter of Samuel Foote. Seventeen returned to their friends, with 
an addition of two babes born in Canada. 

The Canada babes.— The two babes born in Canada were females; one was a daughter 
of Benjamin Wait, born January 22, 1678; the other a daughter of Stephen Jennings, born 
March 14, 1678. To commemorate the captivity in Canada, Wait's child was named Can- 
ada, and Jennings' child. Captivity, and these names they ever retained. Canada Wait 
married Joseph Smith, son of the John Smith of Hadley, who was slain in Hatfield meadow, 
May 30, 1676; she was the grandmother of the late Oliver Smith and his five brothers. 
Stephen Jennings removed to Brookfield, and his daughter, Captivity, married Abijah 
Bartlett of that town. 

Benjamin Wait and Stephen Jennings, men of energy and 
perseverance, undertook to redeem their wives and children, and 
the other captives. They obtained a commission from the gov- 
ernment of Massachusetts, and set out from Hatfield on the 24th 
of October, and went by way of Westfield to Albany. The ruling 
men frowned upon their enterprise, and after they had proceeded 
to Schenectady, brought them back by force to Albany, and sent 
them down to New York to Gov. Andros, under pretence of 
some new order from him. Capt. Brockhurst interceded for 
them, and they were sent back with a pass, and arrived at Albany, 
Nov. 19. Here they again met with discouragements, and were 
obliged to hire a Mohawk Indian to conduct them to Lake George. 
This savage was more humane and friendly than the governing 
men in the colony. The lake being open, he fitted up for them a 
canoe, about Dec. 16, and drew for them a draught of the lakes 
they were to pass.* They went down Lake George, and carried 
their canoe two miles upon their backs, to Lake Champlain, 
where they were hindered by ice and head-winds many days, and 
reached Chamblee on the 6th of January, 1678. At Sorell and 
the vicinity, they found the captives. They went down to Que- 
bec, where they were civilly entertained by the French governor, 
who granted them a guard of eleven persons towards Albany. 
They left Quebec on the 19th of April, and Sorell on the 2d of 
May, having redeemed all the captives. The French had been 
kind to them. They arrived at Albany, on Wednesday, the 22d 
of May. 

*They were ignorant of the country, being the first New England men that ever passed 
down Lakes George and Champlain to Canada. 


From Albany, a messenger was sent to Hatfield with the follow- 
ing letters, written by two plain men. They are natural and 
unstudied, and coming from the heart, must have reached the 
hearts of others, especially Wait's. 

Albany, May 22, 1678. 
Loving wife, 

Having now opportunity to remember my kind love to thee and our child, and the rest 
of our friends, though we met with great afflictions and trouble since I see thee last, yet here 
is now opportunity of joy and thanksgiving to God, that we are now pretty well, and in a 
hopeful way to see the faces of one another, before we take our final farewell of this 
present world. Likewise God hath raised up friends amongst our enemies, and there is 
but three of us dead of all those that were taken away — Sergeant Plympton, Samuel 
Russel, Samuel Foot's daughter. So I conclude being in haste, and rest your most 
affectionate husband, till death makes a separation. 


Albany, May 23, 1678. 
To my loving friends and kindred at Hatfield, 

These few lines are to let you understand that we are arrived at Albany now with the 
captives, and we now stand in need of assistance, for my charges is very great and heavy; 
and therefore any that have any love to our condition, let it move them to come and help 
us in this strait. Three of the captives are murdered, — old Goodman Plympton, Samuel 
Foot's daughter, Samuel Russell. All the rest are alive and well and now at Albany, namely, 
Obadiah Dickinson and his child, Mary Foot and her child, Hannah Jennings and 3 chil- 
dren, Abigail Allis, Abigail Bartholomew, Goodman Coleman's children. Samuel Kellogg, 
my wife and 4 children, and Quintin Stockwell. I pray you hasten the matter, for it requireth 
great haste. Stay not for the Sabbath, nor shoeing of horses. We shall endeavor to meet 
you at Canterhook [Kinderhook;] it may be at Housatonock. We must come very softly 
because of our wives and children. I pray you, hasten them, stay not night nor day, for 
the matter requireth haste, Bring provisions with you for us. 

Your loving kinsman, 


At Albany, written from mine own hand. As I have been affected to yours all that were 
fatherless, be affected to me now, and hasten the matter and stay not, and ease me of my 
charges. You shall not need to be afraid of any enemies. 

They remained in Albany five days, and on Monday, May 27, 
walked twenty-two miles to Kinderhook, where they met men and 
horses from Hatfield. They rode through the woods to Westfield, 
and soon all reached Hatfield in safety. The captives had been 
absent eight months, and Wait and Jennings, seven months. 
The day of their arrival was one of the most joyful days that 
Hatfield ever knew. The ransom of the captives cost above 
two hundred pounds, which was gathered by contribution among 
the English. 

Copies of the letters of Stockwell and Wait were carried to 
Medfield, on the 29th of May, and Rev. John Wilson, of that 
place, immediately sent them to the governor and council at 
Boston, who had previously appointed the 6th of June, as a day 
of fasting and humiliation. After receiving these letters, they 
issued an additional notice to the public. May 30th: — 


"Knowing that the labor, hazard and charge of said Benjamin Wait and his associate 
have been great, we recommend their case with the captives for relief, to the pious charity 
of the elders, ministers and congregations of the several towns; that on the fast day, they 
manifest their charity by contributing to the relief of said persons. And the ministers are 
desired to stir up the people thereunto. For quickening this work, we do hereby remit a 
copy of Benjamin Wait's letter,* to be read publicldy either before or upon that day; and 
what is freely given, is to be remitted to Mr. Anthony Stoddard, Mr. John Joylifl and Mr. 
John Richards, or either of them, who are appointed to deliver and distribute the same for 
the ends aforesaid." Signed by Edward Rawson, Secretary. 


Fears on account of the attack upon Hatfield — Hadley fortifications — Number of persons 
slain in Hampshire — Buildings burnt— Benevolence — Cost of the war — Head-quarters 
at Mr. Russell's — War taxes in Hampshire — Colony expenses in Hampshire — Soldiers' 
wages — Flint locks and match locks — Praying Indians — Noises in the air — Garrison at 
Quabaug — Posts — Hadley Mill, the parley, &c. — Surgeon — Ferry-men and others — 
Scenes in Hadley. 

The sudden and unlocked for onset upon Hatfield excited 
much apprehension. It was feared that other parties of Indians 
would fall upon the frontier towns. A few soldiers were stationed 
at Hatfield for a year after Sept. 1677, ^^^ some at Hadley for 
six months in 1678. The fortifications about the Hampshire 
towns were repaired or rebuilt, and kept in order several years, 
and men went to their labors and to public worship, with their 
arms in their hands. In Oct. 1677, the General Court ordered 
that the Hampshire towns should endeavor to new model the 
situation of their houses, so as to be more compact, and men 
from the five towns were appointed a committee, to regulate the 
same. They were not able to effect much, except at Westfield. 

Hadley Fortifications, &c. — In Feb. 1677, the town voted to 
fortify the meeting-house; the selectmen were to call out men 
and teams for the work. They also voted that every male inhab- 
itant above 16 years of age, should bring arms and ammunition 
to meeting on Lord's days and at Lectures, or forfeit a shilling for 
every neglect. 

The meeting-house appears to have been surrounded with a 
palisade. One object of this was to provide a place of refuge, to 
which the women and children could flee, and which the men 
could defend. Men carried arms to meeting because it was im- 

*When Benjamin Wait wrote this letter to the people of Hatfield, he little thought that 
it would be read in all the pulpits of Massachusetts. 


portant that they should be near their arms, in case of an attack 
upon any part of the village. They undoubtedly carried arms 
to the meeting-house in 1675 and 1676. 

Hadley repaired the east fortifications in 1677. In Jan. 1678, 
the town voted not to include the five houses at the north end, 
but would give to the owners land to build upon within the pali- 
sade. On the lOth of December, 1678, they voted to build a new 
fortification on the east side; the stuff to be ten feet in length and 
three inches thick, set two feet into the ground; and if rails were 
used, they were to be substantial. The west fortification was to 
be repaired. Every man was to make his proportion of the pali- 
sade according to the town list of estates. Men made their pro- 
portion on their own land, where it could be done. In April, 
1684, the town voted to keep up the fortification on the east side. 
The east palisade extended from Nathaniel Dickinson's lot on 
the south, to William Partrigg's lot on the north, and included 
the buildings on those lots. (See page 24.) The length was not 
far from a mile. The only gate on that side was one in the middle 
highway. Each squadron built a watch-house in 1678 or 1679. 

Persons slain at different places in Hampshire county, in 1676 and 1677, including 3 
killed in Canada. 

March. In the expedition of Majors Sav- 
age and Treat, towards Millers' River, 
At Westfield, "on the last snowy day," 
March 14. At Northampton, 
March 26 and 27. Below Springfield, 
In West Springfield, 
April 1st or 2d. In Hadley, near Mount 

May 19. In and after the Falls fight, 3 
May 30. At Hatfield, 
June 12. At Hadley, 

— More than 80 of these belonged to the 
64 county. 

Buildings burnt. — The number of dwelling-houses burnt in 
Hampshire was not less than one hundred and ten, but many of 
them were small, cheap buildings. The number of barns burnt was 
less. The houses consumed in the three towns destroyed. Brook- 
field, Northfield and Deerfield, may be estimated at 45; Spring- 
field, 33, Westfield, 3, Northampton, 10, Hatfield, 16,* Hadley, 
none, Suffield, some, and Swampfield,t a few. Of the five 

*Hatfield said in a petition, April, 1678, that they had lost from one-third to one-half of 
their dwelling-houses, the greater part of their kine, sheep and horses, and many barns. 

•j-The deputies of the General Court, in May, i68o, say that, "of ten towns in Hampshire, 
five are wholly dissipated." They include Swampfield or Sunderland in the ten towns. 
There must have been a few buildings there in 1675, before the war. 


Sept. 19. At Hatfield, 
" " At Deerfield, 



In Canada, 






Slain in three years. 
In 1675, 
In 1676, 
In 1677, 






towns remaining, Hatfield, in proportion to her population, 
suffered the greatest loss of life and property. The loss of prop- 
erty by Springfield village, separate from the town, was greater. 
Hadley lost the least property, and Westfield the fewest lives. It 
is not known that Hadley had a single dwelling-house burnt. 

Boston and other places in Massachusetts often made generous 
contributions for suffering families, and for the redemption of 
captives. The people of the river towns were kind towards the 
sufferers among them. Connecticut contributed liberally for the 
relief of other colonies in 1676 and 1677. The contribution of 
Windsor in 1676 was equal to 170 bushels of Indian corn. Con- 
necticut relieved some in Hampshire. — There was much com- 
passion and benevolence in New England. 

Cost of the War. — The disbursements in this war, according to 
the records of the commissioners at Hartford, in Sept. 1678, were 
as follows: — 

Massachusetts, .... ;^46,292 
Connecticut, .... 23,173 

Plymouth, .... ^^,74-3 


Massachusetts had expended 6 or 7000 pounds on the war in 
Maine. Exclusive of this, each colony had disbursed not far 
from its share. Connecticut refused to aid in defending Maine, 
as it did not belong to Massachusetts when the confederation was 
formed. Plymouth paid lOOO;^ for the eastern war. The ex- 
penses of war were to be borne by the colonies in this proportion : — 
Massachusetts, 100, Connecticut, 60, Plymouth, 30. The prop- 
erty destroyed by the Indians, and many expenses of towns, are 
not embraced in the 81,000 pounds. Bancroft's statement that 
"the disbursements and losses equalled half a million of dollars," 
seems not excessive, f 

Head-quarters in Hadley. — During the war, the head-quarters 
were at the house of Rev. John Russell, and he entertained the 

•j-Trumbull has a statement that about 600 inhabitants of New England were slain in 
this war, 12 or 13 towns entirely destroyed, and about 600 buildings burnt. In a note, he 
expresses an opinion that the loss was much greater. Secretary Rawson of Mass. wrote, 
Jan. 4, 1677 — "By sending to our several towns, we find 660 families, consisting of 2265 
persons, in distress, and yet want returns from 13 towns." 

Connecticut lost and suffered much less than other parts of New England. She had no 
enemies within her borders, except a few stragglers from other colonies. Her own Indians 
were helpers and not foes. She performed her duty honorably as one of the New England 


principal officers.* Two requests or petitions for pay, in Sep- 
tember and October, 1677, were signed by his friends, and one of 
them by his wife Rebecca Russell, but not by him. The whole 
sum charged was then ;^78.i3.8. They say that the "chief 
gentlemen improved in the affairs of the war were entertained 
there, which called for provisions answerable, and was of the best 
to be had."f He had "to draw divers barrels of beer, and much 
wine, and fruit suitable to the company; and had no more credit 
for such company by the week or meal than other men for ordinary 
entertainment." "The great cumber, trouble and burden upon 
his wife," are noticed. — The account was paid. 

War Taxes in Hampshire. — A country rate was one penny on 
every pound of estate in the lists, and is. 8d. on each poll. In 
1675, there were 10 country rates ordered; in 1676, 16 rates; in 
1677, 9 rates, making 35 country rates laid in three years. A 
few of them were for ordinary expenses. A single country rate 
on the five Hampshire towns, in October, 1675, was as follows: — 
Springfield, ;^26.5.5, Northampton, ;^, Hadley, ;^, 
Westfield, ;^ii.i6.o, Hatfield, ;^8.i2.o. Each rate was the same 
in 1676, and apparently nearly the same in 1667, but there were 
some abatements for losses in war. The Hadley country rates 
in three years were 35 times ;^, or about 648 pounds, in 
country pay. The taxes were equally heavy in all parts of the 

Colony expenses in Hampshire. — The Hampshire towns, espec- 
ially the upper ones, fed so many troops and horses, and furnished 
so many other things for the army, that they had very heavy 
charges against the colony, and their taxes were paid in this way. 
Hatfield was allowed ;^788 until May ist, 1676, Northampton, 
6g'j£, and Hadley much more than either; and there were large 
disbursements by these towns for the colony after May i, 1676, 
amounting to about 8oO;^ in Hadley and Hatfield. In October, 
1680, the sum still due to Hadley was ^^900, to Hatfield, ;^400, 

*The two judges, Whalley and Goffe, were undoubtedly at Peter Tilton's and Lieut. 
Samuel Smith's during the war. They could not have been concealed at Mr, Russell's. 

•j-Men in ofBce, civil and military, lived well in those days. And the laboring classes and 
soldiers had a good supply of substantial food. The following "estimate of what will serve 
500 soldiers one month" was made Feb. 15, 1676, by the Committee of War. 

15000 biscuit, 20 barrels pork, 30 barrels beef, 1000 pounds of bacon and 1000 pounds of 
cheese (or 10 cwts.) 50 bushels Indian corn parched and beaten into nocake [Indian, noke- 
hick;] 300 small bags for each man to carry nocake; stockings and shoes, 200 pairs of each; 
shirts and drawers, 100 of each; 50 waistcoats, 100 wallets, 6 barrels powder, 1200 pounds, 
(or 12 cwts.) of shot, [bullets,] 2000 flints, 300 bushels of oats and 100 bushels barley, for 


and to Northampton and the other towns, about ;^6oo. The 
colony paid the ;^I900 before 1684. 

Pay of garrisons. — Northampton, Hadley, and Hatfield paid 
their own garrison soldiers in the winter of 1675-6, and until May, 
without the aid of the colony. 

The wages of soldiers in this war were six shillings per week in 
Massachusetts, and food. They received clothing when they 
remained in service some weeks, or months. The six shillings 
was in "country pay." The diet or board of soldiers was about 
5s. per week; less in some places. 

Match locks and flint locks were both in use when thewarbegan, 
but the latter superseded the former, and few match locks were 
used in 1676. Match locks and muskets with rests were not fitted 
for Indian warfare. The Indians did not use match locks, and 
had not perhaps at any time. They were excellent marksmen. 

Friendly Indians. — Connecticut managed Indians more wisely 
than Massachusetts. They were generally pagans, but she 
treated them kindly, and Dep. Gov. Leete wrote in April, 1676, 
that no Indians belonging to Connecticut had become hostile. 
In Massachusetts, a great prejudice arose among the people 
against all Christian Indians because a few had proved false, and 
their enmity knew no bounds. Honest and faithful praying 
Indians were falsely accused, insulted, robbed, imprisoned, some 
shot at and wounded and others murdered. There was a savage 
antipathy against all Indians. But whenever the Christian In- 
dians were employed in the service, they were brave and faithful, 
and the hatred of the people gradually abated, and after April, 
1676, the Christian Indian soldiers were constantly employed, 
and performed signal services. 

Noises in the Air. — Mather says — "It is certain that before this 
war broke out, viz. on Sept. 10, 1674, in Northampton, Hadley 
and other towns thereabouts, was heard the report of a great piece 
of ordnance with a shaking of the earth, and a considerable echo, 
when there was no ordnance really discharged at or near any of 
those towns." 

Such noises in the air have occurred not unfrequently in diff- 
erent countries. There is nothing portentous in them. 

Garrison at Quabaug. — This was kept up through the spring, 
and perhaps through the summer of 1676. Quarters were built 
for soldiers, who were furnished with provisions and ammunition, 
carried from Marlborough on the backs of horses. Sometimes 
15 men conducted 30 horses, and were escorted by 20 troopers. 
In the early part of May, it was expected that Hadley and other 


towns on the river would supply the garrison with provisions, to 
be conveyed on horses as before, but for some reason the plan 
failed at that time. 

Posts traveled between Connecticut River and Boston during 
the war, except in the winter, and were not harmed. Nathaniel 
Warner of Hadley, who came from Brookfield, was a post to 
Boston many times in 1675 and 1676. 

Hadley Mill. — It is remarkable that this lonely mill, about 
three miles north of the village, was not destroyed by the Indians 
in 1675 or 1676. The garrison kept there seems to have been very 
small — sometimes only 2, 3 or 4 men. The accounts of the attack on 
the mill, and the parley in 1677, do not agree. Stockwell's Narra- 
tive differs from other statements.* "The burning of the corn-mill 
by the enemy" is noticed in the Hadley records, not elsewhere. 

Doct. William Locke came to Hadley with Capt. Lothrop, and 
was there more than a year, as a physician and surgeon. He 
wrote to Mr. Rawson for medicines for wounded men. May 30, 
1676 — 5 kinds of emplastrum, 2 or 3 kinds of oil, and many other 
things, and added, "old linen as much as you can get." 

The Hadley ferry-men were busy during the war. Soldiers 
were frequently crossing the river, sometimes by hundreds. Jo- 
seph Kellogg, at the lower ferry, received of the colony in 1677, 
40 pounds for the ferriage of soldiers, and for a team lost in the 
service. Samuel Partrigg, who had the direction of the upper 
ferry, received 20 pounds, Oct. 1677, for ferrying soldiers. 

Samuel Porter took care of most of the wounded soldiers at 
Hadley, and laid out much for their provision and comfort. So 
says the record of the General Court, September, 1676. There 
was due to him for what he had expended on the country's account 
about 200;^. 

Richard Montague baked for the soldiers, and Timothy Nash 
repaired their arms. 

Hadley was not a dull place in the war. The houses were often 
filled to overflowing, companies of soldiers were arriving and 
departing, armed men appeared daily in the broad street, and the 
red flag waved in the breeze. There were various scenes and 
occurrences in those cluttered dwellings, both serious and ludi- 
crous. Nothing disreputable is recorded. 

I have intended to confine this history of the war, chiefly to the 
county of Hampshire. 

*Can it be that the women and children that came from Wachuset (page 176) are the 
same that Gookin says were carried away with Wannalancet, from near Chelmsford, by a 
party that came from Canada with those that assailed Hatfield ? 

Birthplace of Bishop Hinting ton 

Birthplace of Genehal Joseph Hooker 




Bounds of Hadley and Additions — Grant of 1673 — Grant of 1683 — Land at the Falls — 
Grant of 1727 — Survey of 1739 — Controversy with Hatfield, 1707 — 1733 — New House- 
lots — Addition to old Houselots — New Street and Lots — Grants of land — Skirts of 
Forty Acres and Hockanum — Fort River Pastures — Hadley Swamps. 

The General Court determined in October, 1663, that the 
bounds of Hadley, on the east side of the river, should be five 
miles from their meeting-house place, up the river, five miles down 
the river, and four miles east from the most eastern part of the 
river. The people of Hadley asked for an enlargement of their 
township, at the October session, 1672. They recurred to their 
old difficulties, — their small divisions of land, the high price paid 
the Indians, the 200;^ paid to Mr. Bradstreet, and the loss of one- 
third of their productive land and many of their company to make 
Hatfield. They continued: — 

"The common feeding place* of our working cattle, whereby we carry on our husbandry, 
is without our town-bounds, and our want of hay ground is such as necessitates us to seek 
out some remote, boggy meadow, either to take hay from or carry our cattle to, that we may 
keep them alive; our interval land by reason of the high situation of it being seldom flooded, 
and so not continuing to yield grass as in the plantations lower down the river, and as here 

They asked for an addition to make their plantation equal to 8 
miles square. They said the greater part of their wood-land was 
"barren pine plain, capable of very little improvement." — Rev. 
John Russell wrote the petition, and 38 persons signed it, viz.. 

John Russell 
Peter Tilton 
John Russell, Sr. 
Aaron Cook 
Richard Goodman 
John Crow 
John Dickinson 
Philip Smith 
John Hubbard 
Joseph Baldwin 
Thomas Coleman 
Daniel Hovey 
Francis Barnard 

Thomas Welles 
Timothy Nash 
Samuel Gardner 
Samuel Church 
Samuel Moody 
Chileab Smith 
Joseph Baldwin (Jr.) 
Edward Church 
Richard Montague 
Samuel Gardner, Jr. 
William Gaylor 
Joseph Warriner 
Mark Warner 

Isaac Harrison 
William Markham 
Thos. Dickinson 
John Smith 
Samuel Partrigg 
Samuel Porter 
Andrew Warner 
Caleb Watson 
William Lewis 
Nathaniel Dickinson 
Edward Scott 
Henry Clarke 

In General Court, May 7, 1673: — ''In answer to the petition of the inhabitants of Hadley, 
for the settlement of the bounds thereof, it is ordered, that their bounds shall run from their 
meeting-house five miles up the river, five miles down the river, and six miles from their 
meeting-house eastward." 

♦Their common feeding place was probably in the present town of Amherst, and mucii 
of it east of the four miles. 


In May, 1683, the selectmen of Hadley, in the name of the town, 
petitioned for an addition to their southern bounds, of three miles 
in width, running four miles east from the river. They repre- 
sented that their young people were straitened for want of enlarge- 
ment, and removed to remote places; and "the inhabitants are 
shut up on the east and north by a desolate, barren desert," refer- 
ring to the pine lands. 

In General Court, May i6, 1683: — "In answer to the petition of the inhabitants of Had- 
ley, the Court judgeth meet to grant, as an addition of land, to the township of Hadley, four 
miles square, provided that Major Pynchon may have his five hundred acres, part of a 
former grant to him, and formerly taken up within that tract; to be laid out in such form as 
the selectmen of Hadley and he shall agree, and that said land be of the township of Hadley." 

This grant was useless to Hadley while the French and Indian 
wars continued. It was not surveyed until October, 17 15, when 
John Chandler, Jr. of Woodstock, was employed to lay out these 
16 square miles or 10,240 acres. The north line began on the 
river, below the mouth of Stony Brook and ran eastward, on the 
old boundary line, 1500 rods; the east line was 1060 rods; the 
south line was the boundary of Springfield, 1420 rods; and the 
western limit was the river. This appears to have been the first 
measurement of land in Hadley, by the aid of the surveyor's com- 
pass. Hadley then extended from Springfield to Sunderland, 
above thirteen miles. 

At the same time, Mr. Chandler surveyed Major Pynchon's 500 
acres at the south-west corner of the addition. The north line 
was 460 rods in length, the east line 240 rods, the south line, on 
Springfield border, 180 rods,* and the western boundary was the 
river, running south-easterly, and the great falls. In 1726, Wil- 
liam Pynchon of Springfield, sold to John Taylor of Hadley, two- 
thirds of the five hundred acres, for twenty shillings an acre, in the 
currency of that day, equal to about one dollar and thirty or forty 
cents. It is probablethat Taylor purchased the other third. The 
500 acres embraced the site of the present village at South Hadley 
Canal,f and the water privileges at the falls on the east side of the 
river. For upwards of fifty years, after 1726, the land was occu- 
pied by the Taylors and others for agricultural purposes; and the 
water of the river carried a saw-mill. In the fishing season, 
many people resorted to the place, and there was noise and bustle, 
but during most of the year, few dwellings in the township were 
more retired and sequestered than those in this nook. There 

*I traced portions of the three lines without difficulty in 1848. A part of the north 
line was uncertain. 

•j-This was written in 1848. 


were no freight boats, no shops nor inns; and few sounds were 
heard by the river's side but the roaring of the falls and the scream- 
ing of the loon. 

In November, 1727, twenty-one persons, who resided south of 
Mount Holyoke, in Hadley, and intended to form a precinct there, 
sent a petition to the General Court, asking for the land between 
the addition laid out in 1715, and the equivalant lands, after- 
wards Belchertown. This tract, called four miles long and two 
wide, or eight square miles, was granted. This addition is now 
the south-eastern part of Granby. The township of Hadley after 
this grant, contained about eighty square miles. 

In April, 1739, Oliver Partridge of Hatfield, was employed to 
survey the township of Hadley, according to the grant of 1673. 
He first ascertained the point or place that was exactly six miles 
due east of the old meeting-house, and from that point measured 
north five miles and south five miles; and from each extremity of 
this line of ten miles, he run a line directly west to Connecticut 
River. These three lines, with the river, were the bounds of 
Hadley according to the grant of 1673. His south line was 7 
miles and 94 rods, east line 10 miles, and north line 4 miles and 
142 rods. A line running east from the Connecticut, at the mouth 
of Mohawk brook, long considered the dividing line between 
Hadley and Sunderland, Mr. Partridge found to be 55 rods too 
far south at the east end, and 50 rods at the west end, and that 
Sunderland possessed 457 acres of land that belonged to Hadley. 
Sunderland petitioned against the removal of the old line. In 
December, 1740, the General Court accepted of Mr. Partridge's 
plan, with the exception of the north line, which, they decided, 
should remain where it had been, and Hadley was to have 457 
acres elsewhere, near Sunderland. This equivalent was taken up 
adjoining the Connecticut above the "fishing bar" at Deerfield 
Falls, and was called the "Hadley Farm above Sunderland." 
It was sold by Hadley in 1749.* 

Another contest between Hadley and Hatfield. — Hadley had 
another controversy with Hatfield, which continued a quarter of 

*When the boundaries of Hadley and the otherold townships in Hampshire were definitely 
established, the direction of the lines was taken by the magnetic needle, without regard to 
the true meridian. This was done when the deviation of the needle fromfthe true north 
point, was 8 degrees or more, to the westward. This variation is readily perceived by ex- 
amining upon a map the east and north lines of the former townships of Springfield and 
Hadley, and the north lines of other townships upon the river. The lines of Mr. Chandler 
and Mr. Partridge were according to the compass, without any allowance for the variation 
of the needle, which'in 1739 was about 8 degrees to the west. It is less now (1848) and the 
direction of the lines is consequently not the same by the compass as in 1739. 


a century, or from 1707 to 1733. Several Hadley men had re- 
moved to Hatfield, and others had sold their lands on the west side 
to Hatfield men, and in 30 or 40 years many lots of land in the 
Ponsets, which had belonged to persons in Hadley, were possessed 
by residents in Hatfield; yet they were a part of Hadley, and taxed 
for the benefit of that town. The people of Hatfield disliked this 
state of things, and sought for a change. In December, 1707, 
Hatfield voted to search records and consult able lawyers. In 
May, 1709, they petitioned the General Court that the river might 
be the boundary between the two towns, and the land on the west 
side pay taxes to Hatfield. The people of Hadley, in August, 
instructed their representative, Daniel Marsh, "to defend Hadley 
against so unjust a petition." The General Court heard the parties 
Nov. 4, 1709, and "ordered that the petition be dismissed, and 
that it be recommended to the selectmen and inhabitants of Had- 
ley, to accommodate their neighbors of Hatfield, on consideration 
of the many advantages Hadley has over and above Hatfield." 
Hadley was not disposed to comply. Several letters passed be- 
tween the towns in January and February, 1710, and they dis- 
puted respecting the advantages which Hadley was said to have 
over Hatfield in the division of 1669. Hatfield aflfirmed that 
their meadow land was not so good as that of Hadley; that their 
great meadow was inferior to any meadow possessed by Hadley; 
and that their uplands were poor and mountainous, and inferior 
to those of Hadley; the latter having some valuable tracts of up- 
land both north and south of Mount Holyoke. As to the agree- 
ment of 1669, Hatfield said that 40 years made a difference in 
circumstances, and this difference required corresponding changes. 
Hadley, on the other hand, averred that Hatfield had privileges 
in some respects better than those of Hadley; and they thought 
the agreement of 1669 "ought to be binding on the consciences of 
all good people." 

In May, 17 10, Hatfield again requested the General Court to 
make the river the boundary between the towns; this petition was 
renewed in 1712 and in 1715. Committees were appointed in 
1715, 1716 and 1718, but nothing decisive took place. Hadley 
strenuously opposed all the eflports of Hatfield. A petition was 
sent by Hatfield in 1730, and after a delay of three years, a com- 
mittee, on the 2d of November, 1733, reported that Connecticut 
River should be the bound between Hadley and Hatfield, and 
their report was accepted by all branches the same day. 

Additional Homelots. — The 47 homelots originally laid out, 
were the only ones granted for some years. Three lots granted 



in 1670, were not taken up. In March, 1669, the town gave to 
Joseph Warriner, a houselot 7 rods by 12, "in the middle of the 
street," near the north end, and he built a house and barn, and 
lived upon this lot, until about 1690, when he sold to Eleazar 
Warner for 28 pounds, and removed to Enfield. 

Between the river and the four small houselots at the north end 
of the east tier, the land was used as a street, perhaps 20 or 30 
rods in width or more. In 1672, the town began to grant this 
for houselots and other uses, leaving a highway south of the lots. 
The following grants next to the river were made: — 

1st, or most western lot, to John Preston, i acre, in 1679, 

zd, or next lot east, to Joseph Barnard, 2 " 1673, 

3d, ... to Dr. John Westcarr, 2 " 1673, 

4th, ... to Isaac Harrison, 2 " 1672, 

5th, ... to William Gaylord, 2 " 1672, 

6th, ... to Peter Montague, 2 " 1673, 

7th, ... to Henry White, 3 " 1680, 

8th, ... to Isaac Warner, some acres, in 1681, 

extending up the river towards Coleman's brook, west of the highway 

to Forty Acres. 

One or two houses were built upon these river lots before the 
Indian war, and there were five houses upon this north highway 
which were not included in the palisade. All these small lots, 
on both sides of the highway, were washed away by the river 
more than loo years since. 

While attacks from the Indians were feared, some small house- 
lots were granted in or near the street in 1677, 1678 and 1679, viz., 
to John Preston next to Samuel Gardner's houselot; to John 
Ingram from the town homelot, which came back to the town in 
1696; to Edward Scott, on the south side of the south highway 
into the meadow; to Quintin Stockwell, within the fortification, 
which he did not occupy. 

Mark Warner, in 1680, had a grant forty rods long and three 
rods wide, from the middle highway, next to Mr. Russell's house- 
lot, to build on. He removed to Northampton, but he claimed 
this land, and the town did not allow his claim. Their dispute 
was not at an end in 1712. 

In March, 1679, the town voted to build a house for Thomas 
Webster (or buy an old one,) and set it in the middle highway into 
the meadow, on a piece of common land adjoining the pound, 
and not far from the house William Webster lived in. Thomas 
Webster had been driven from Northfield and lost his property. 
William Webster was also poor. Two sons of Gov. Webster 
lived some years in this highway, near the east end, in small houses 
built by the town. The pound was near them. One of the 


buildings long remained for a poor family to live in, and was 
called the town-house. 

Hadley fortunately passed through the war and the ensuing 
years of danger, without disfiguring and obstructing her spacious 
street, by permanent inclosures and buildings. 

Addition to the old Houselots. — The plain upon which Hadley 
village was built, was, like most other terraces or levels in the 
vicinity of Connecticut River, lowest on the side farthest from the 
river. On the east side of this plain, next to the bank of the higher 
plain where the middle street is, there was low, swampy land, 
which was not included in the homelots. In January, 1674, the 
town permitted the homelots of John Russell, Jr., of the Town, 
Thomas Wells, John Hubbard, Samuel Porter and John Dickin- 
son, to be extended "from the rear as now fenced up, to the bank 
eastward." In 1675, ^^^ ^^ ^^^ of those living on the lower part 
of the street were allowed to extend their homelots "to the bank 
on the east side of the swamp," or as it was sometimes expressed, 
"to the hill over the low valley." In Feb. 1675, the town sold to 
Doct. John Westcarr, for 10 pounds, the low land, south of the 
middle highway, in the rear of five homelots, viz., those of John 
Barnard, Andrew Bacon, Nathaniel Stanley, Thomas Stanley 
and John White. It was called 6 acres and 96 rods, apparently 
16 rods by 66. All the east homelots were extended to the bank 
or hill except the five. 

A new Street and new Homelots. — In 25 years after the plant- 
ing of Hadley, buildings had not been erected on more than four 
or five homelots, in addition to the first forty-seven. The number 
of familes had not much increased; they were near 50 in 1662, and 
in 1685, they did not exceed 60. Some of the first settlers died 
without children, several returned to Connecticut, and a number 
of young men settled at Hartford, Hatfield, and other places. 
There was, however, a considerable increase of young persons. 

The tract of land east of the old homelots was denominated the 
Pine Plain; the trees had been cut off, and it was covered with 
brush. In 1679, the town voted to clear it of brush, that it might 
be fit for feeding. In 1682, it was again ordered that the pine 
plain should be cleared. 

On the 1 2th of February, 1684, the town voted that a tier of 
lots should be laid out upon the pine plain, "excepting or seques- 
tering 20 rods in breadth for a highway at the rear of the old home- 
lots; to run from the north end of the town to Fort Meadow, and 
eastward of said way the lots aforesaid to be laid out, to begin at 
Joseph Smith's lot at the north end, and run as far as there is 



common land to the Fort Meadow, leaving highways into the 
woods." A committee of five was appointed to lay out the lots. 
They were lots of eight acres, or i6 by 80 rods. 

In 1687, most of the lots were granted to individuals, on con- 
dition that they built upon them within three years. Another 
Indian war commenced the next year, and no man would build 
without the fortification. In 1690, the grants were renewed and 
again in 1692. In 1699, after the return of peace, 26 lots between 
the north highway and the Bay road, were recorded. Some lots 
were granted east of these, and provision was made for a high- 
way 16 rods wide, 120 rods east of the other. There were other 
lots of eight acres between the Bay road and Fort Meadow. 

Record of the lots on the Pine Plain, April 5, 1699, beginning at the north highway, and 
proceeding southward. Sixteen lots were north, and ten south, of the highway which was 
a continuation of the middle highway into the woods. 

Highway 10 rods wide. 

17 Daniel Marsh, 80 by 16, 

18 Experience Porter, " 

19 Thomas Selden, " 

20 John Taylor, " 

Highway 32 rods in front, and 5 in rear. 

21 John Smith, 80 by 16, 

22 Nathaniel White, 

23 Thomas Hovey, " 

24 Capt. Aaron Cook, " 

25 John Kellogg, " 

26 NehemiahDickinson,"' 
Road to Brookfield and the Bay. 

1 Luke Smith, 8 acres, irregular, 

2 Samuel Smith, 80 rods by 16, 

3 Samuel Porter, 

4 George Stillraan, " " 

5 Joseph Smith, " 

6 William Rooker, " *' 

7 Samuel Partrigg, " " 

8 Peter Montague, " " 

9 Ebenezer Smith, " " 

10 Nathaniel Warner, " " 

Highway 8 rods wide. 

11 Not granted 1699. Given to John 

Montague, Jr. 1713. 80 by 13^. 

12 Samuel Ingram, 80 by 10, 

13 Samuel Boltwood, 80 by 16, 

14 Widow Hannah Porter, 80 by 16, 
15, 16 Timothy Nash's heirs, 

2 lots, 80 by 32. 

A few frames were put up on this new street, but another 
Indian and French war commenced in 1703, and continued about 
ten years, and the street was not inhabited. At the end of half 
a century from the first settlement of Hadley, the inhabitants 
were confined to the old forty-seven homelots, and five or six 
small lots subsequently added. Some of the lots had two houses 
on them, and several houses had two families. About 17 13, 
men began to build houses on the new street, and in 1720, fifteen 
families resided in them. 

Grants of Land. — In 1673, a piece of high interval upon the 
Connecticut, having Mill River on the south, and School Meadow 
fence on the north, was in part given to three men, and in part 
reserved for the use of the town. In 1699, the town's part was 
given to four persons. The number of acres in this parcel of 


land may have been forty or fifty. There was a saw-mill near 
the south-east corner in 1696. 

In 1672, the town sequestered for their own use a piece of land 
called 8 acres, at the north end of the upper School Meadow. It 
was used by Rev. Mr. Hopkins, and perhaps by preceding min- 
isters. The town sold it to Deac. Jason Stockbridge for 500 dol- 
lars about 30 or 40 years since. It was then swampy and bushy, 
but is now (1848) a productive meadow, containing about 15 acres. 

In 1673, the meadow land north of the preceding lot, and a 
strip of high interval, extending to Sunderland line, west of the 
pine plain, were granted to four men, except one acre and a half 
near the mouth of Mohawk brook, which the proprietors of 
Swampfield were allowed to fence in, February, 1675, to get good 
ground for their fence. 

Skirts of Forty Acres. — In March, 1675, the town gave to the 
proprietors of Forty Acre Meadow, liberty to remove their fence 
eastward, and run it round the boggy meadow, and under the 
mountain side, &c. — The addition enclosed within this fence, 
was denominated the Skirts of Forty Acres. The Skirts were 
fully fenced in 1669.* The fence began at Connecticut River 
south of Coleman's brook, thence ran near the bank, round the 
boggy meadow, upon the hill or plain to the stone bridge; thence 
on east side of some lots, and upon the hills to the saw-mill dam; 
and from the saw-mill house on the north side of Mill River, to 
the School Meadow fence, enclosing the interval north of Mill 
River. The fence from the Connecticut round to the saw-mill 
dam, and thence to the School Meadow fence was 935 rods, (esti- 
mating the river-bank fence and two gates equal to 30 rods.) 
This was proportioned among 38 proprietors. The fence was 
proportioned and rebuilt for the last time in 1748, and was then 
739 rods to Mill River, and 172 rods from the School grist-mill 
to the School Meadow fence. On the 2d of August, 1753, the 
proprietors voted that Forty Acres be no more fed as a common 
field, and notice was given that the General Field was dissolved. 
This field, which bore the name of Forty Acres, contained 382 
acres. The Skirts had about twice as many acres as the Meadow. 

The old ditch which belonged to the Forty Acre fence, may 
still be traced in many places, on the plain, on banks, and hill 
sides. In 1748, there were 166 rods of stone wall in this fence. 
Very few rods of stone wall can now be found in Hadley. The 
fence, after it included the Skirts, twice crossed the main road, 

♦The committee that desired the town to appoint men to proportion the fence, desired 
also "the presence of God to abide with you." 


and all travelers through that part of Hadley, had to open and 
shut two gates. 

The farm of Charles Phelps, Esq., so much admired by Pres- 
ident Dwight,* and so well described by him, included a large 
portion of Forty Acre Meadow and Skirts. It is still possessed 
by his son Charles P. Phelps, Esq. and son in law, Rev. Dan 
Huntington, (1848.) 

Hockanum Meadow had its Skirts, of about 140 acres. They 
included the land between the river and meadows on the west, 
and the mountain path, or old Springfield road, on the side of 
Mount Holyoke, on the east. 

Fort Meadow Skirts embraced the swamps and low lands east 
and south-east of the meadow, and separated from it by Fort 
River. They were estimated at no acres. 

Fort River Pastures or Swamp. — In January, 1682, the town 
gave to the proprietors of Fort Meadow the low land "up the 
river from Fort Meadow fence to Lieut. Kellogg's 40 acres and 
above his 40 acres, to make them equal to Forty Acre proprietors 
with their Skirts." The Skirts of Fort Meadow were not suffi- 
cient for this purpose. "The outlets where cattle go over Fort 
River to feed " were not included]in the grant, and they were to give 
allotments to two or three persons who were not proprietors. Jo- 
seph Kellogg's 40 acres were a former grant, near the south end of 
Spruce Hill, and the old road to Brookfield was through this lot. 

This tract of land was laid out to 22 persons in the year 1699. 
Three highways were left; — one 4 rods wide in the lower part, 
one 14 rods wide including the road to Brookfield, which was 
then some rods above where it now is, and one three rods wide 
across Joseph Kellogg's lot, "from hill to hill, where the former 
county road went." The lower lots extended across the river and 
the river valley from the hill on one side to the hill on the other, 
but eleven lots east of Spruce Hill, had for their northern bound- 
ary, the "Nashaway path," an old path formerly traveled when 
the way to Boston was through Nashua (Lancaster.) The whole 
width of all the lots was 720 rods, or 2 miles and 80 rods, and the 
number of acres, 251. These pastures extended eastward almost 
to the present road and bridge near Dickinson's tannery. 

Spruce Swamp is the long swamp, west of the bank called 
Spruce Hill. Lots were not permanently granted here till 1699. 
Four men had nearly the whole, viz., Samuel Boltwood had the 
northern part; next south of him was John Smith, orphan; 3d, 
John Montague; and 4th, Peter Montague, 2d. The latter pur- 

♦Travels in New England, Vol. I., page 357. 


chased of the town in 1714, all the southern part of Spruce Swamp 
down to the Log-bridge, near the present road to Amherst, for 
20 pounds. Much of this swamp is now valuable land. 

Old Swamp was some distance east of Spruce Swamp and was 
not extensive. Lands were granted there in 1680 and after. It 
was some years before they were fenced. 

Partrigg's Swamp and Nut Meadow were east of Mount Warner. 
In 1680, John Warner, from Brookfield, had a grant of 20 acres 
in Partrigg's Swamp, and his son, Mark Warner, 12 acres. 
Henry White had 20 acres in Nut Meadow. The Warners' lots 
returned to the town because they were not improved within 
seven years. White retained his. 

The swamps named Partrigg's, Hubbard's, New, Taylor's, 
and some others, were not appropriated until the Inner Commons 
were laid out. The lots previously granted in some of them, 
came back to the town.* 

The Great Swamp was in the northern part of Hadley, stretch- 
ing into Sunderland. It still remains an extensive swamp. In 
1 714, five lots, recorded as eight acres each, were granted on the 
eastern side of this swamp, beginning where the brook from the 
swamp unites with Mill River, and extending northward about 
half a mile. A sixth lot seems to have been added. These lots, 
or portions of them, were cleared and fenced, and used for mow- 
ing, and some of them are still mowed. In the spring of 1846, 
some of the lowest, wettest lots, presented a fine, green appearance, 
but the grass was mostly sedge. They are in Amherst, westward 
of the meeting-house in the north parish. The rest of the Great 
Swamp was a part of the Inner Commons. 

When Hadley had been settled forty years, there were very 
few fenced fields, except the intervals and homelots. For many 
years after 1700, the woods continued to be the main pastures. 
There were a few inclosures in the swamps and skirts. Next to 
intervals, the swamps were most sought after, one hundred and 
fifty years ago. These produced tall, coarse grass, which was need- 
ed for hay. Hadley often complained of a deficiency of hay-ground. 

Individuals were sometimes allowed to occupy the highways 
into the meadow, between homelots, as pastures, on condition 
of making a gate and fence at one end for the town. They made 
another gate and fence at the other end for themselves, and those 
who passed through these ways, opened and shut two gates. 

John Nash, in 1699, was allowed the use of the Middle Lane 

*Some of the lands called swamps in former days, were only moist ground, and are now 


for ten years, if he maintained a gate and fence at the west end of 
the lane. He also kept a gate not far from the east end, near the 
pound. He had the use of the same a second ten years. The 
pound was a few rods west of the end of the lane. 


Coined Money — Taxation in 17th century — Hampshire country rates — War rates and 
"charges in Hampshire — Money rates — How rates were paid— Grain for taxes — Hadley 
rates, 1682 and 1687 — Changes in Hadley. 

The people of New England kept their accounts, and made 
their computations in pounds, shillings, pence and farthings, 
more than 150 years. Their pound at first was the pound sterling 
of England. The English pound of twenty shillings originally 
contained a pound of silver, Troy-weight, but from 1601 to the 
present century, a pound, or twelve Troy ounces, of standard 
silver, have been coined into 62 shillings in England. When our 
fathers came from England, the silver coins in circulation were 
crowns, half crowns, shillings, and pieces of six pence, four pence, 
three pence, two pence, one penny, and half a penny. There had 
been silver farthings. A crown was five shillings, or one-fourth 
of a pound, and weighed 464^ grains. A shilling weighed 92^*^ 
grains, or one-fifth as much as a crown. 

Massachusetts began to coin money in 1652, and their mint was 
in operation, at times, more than 30 years. Pieces of a shilling, 
six pence, three pence, and two pence were coined. There was 
a pine tree on one side of the coins, and they are sometimes called 
pine-tree money. The shillings contained three pennyweights, 
or 72 grains, of standard silver, and the lesser pieces weighed 
proportionably. They were current throughout New England 
for a century, and passed readily in some other colonies. As the 
Boston shillings weighed only 72 grains, while the English shil- 
lings weighed 92^0 grains, twenty shillings or a pound of the 
former were equal to only fifteen shillings and six pence of the 
latter; or 100 Boston pounds were equal to 77^^ sterling pounds. 
The Boston money was 22J per cent, lighter than the English 
money, but of the same purity. 

This coinage introduced a new currency into Massachusetts 
which differed but little from the New England currency of the 
1 8th century. The new currency was more completely established 
in 1672, when the value of pieces-of-eight, (Spanish dollars,) of 
full weight, was fixed at six shillings, though worth only four shil- 
lings and six pence in England. There was a departure from 
the English currency in 1642, when rix-dollars and pieces-of- 


eight were made current at five shillings, or six pence more than 
their sterling value. The new coins of 1652 made a much greater 
change, and the people of Massachusetts generally ceased to 
reckon and compute in sterling money.* Connecticut raised the 
value of pieces-of-eight to six shillings in 1683. 

Dollars. — Those mentioned by Shakespeare and his cotempo- 
raries were German or Dutch coins. The Spanish coins of about 
the same value were seldom named dollars until near the middle 
of the 1 8th century. In Great Britain and her colonies, they were 
called pieces-of-eight,f because they contained eight rials, or 
reals. Rial is a Spanish name for the coin worth nine pence or 
twelve and a half cents. The quarter of a piece-of-eight (now 25 
cents,) was sometimes called a double rial, or two rials. There 
were half rials, similar to the pieces worth six and a quarter cents. 

Our fathers made their shillings lighter than the English, for 
the purpose of keeping them at home, and they forbid their ex- 
portation. The laws which govern trade had more influence than 
the acts of legislators, and large quantites of the new coins were sent 
to England to pay for goods. The balance of trade was always 
against the colonies, and their silver and gold were exported. | 

Pine-tree coins in Hadley. — Some men in Hadley collected and 
laid up pine-tree money. John Pynchon records in his account 
book, that on the 7th of November, 1678, he borrowed New 
England money in Hadley, and agreed to pay in New England 
money, in three years, as follows: — 

Of Lieut. Samuel Smith, . . . ;^50.o.o 

" Lieut. Philip Smith, , . . 25.0.0 

" Mr. Peter Tilton, . . 12.0.0 

Capt. Aaron Cooke, Jr. . . 10. 0.0 

Hesays hesentthemoneyto Antigua, "topromotethedesign ofplan- 

*Sterling currency practically ceased some years before 1652, or soon after the General 
Court began to fix the prices of grain in 1640. William Pynchon's accounts in Springfield 
from 1645 *° 1650, were not kept in sterling; the prices at Hartford in those years were not 
in sterling. 

The error of some, that New England currency did not supersede that of old England 
until long after 1652, is corrected by Felt in his account of Massachusetts Currency, — a book 
full of valuable information. 

■{•From their Spanish name. 

jThe inventories of some wealthy merchants in Boston show that they were able to 
collect considerable sums, and that a large part was pine-tree money. Henry Webb, who 
died in 1660, had in English money, £148.6.2; Spanish money, £328.11.9; New England 
money, £860.6.2. Henry Shrimpton, who died in 1666, had in English money, £121.3.6; 
in Spanish pieces-of-eight, £99.8.3; New England money, £483.6.5. Antipas Boyse, who 
died in 1669, had in English money, £1.4.0; in pieces-of-eight and halves, quarters, &c., 
£49.5.0; in New England money, £230.0.0. 


tation and sugar work there." A speculation in the West Indies. 

In 1704, by a proclamation of queen Anne, regulating the 
value of foreign coins in the English colonies, pieces-of-eight of 
a certain weight, rix-doUars and French crowns, which were 
valued at four shillings and six pence in England, were to pass in 
the colonies for six shillings each, and halves, quarters and less 
pieces in proportion. Coins at these rates were long called "proc- 
lamation money." By this order, a shilling in the colonies was 
virtually made equivalent to nine pence in England; and a pound 
of twenty shillings, to fifteen shillings sterling. This differed but 
little from the value of Massachusetts shillings in 1652, and of 
pieces-of-eight in 1672. The proclamation was not much re- 
garded in the colonies; paper money deranged everything. But 
whenever there was a specie currency in New England, the piece- 
of-eight, or Spanish dollar was valued at six shillings, and it was 
sometimes referred to as a standard. Commonly silver at six 
shillings and eight pence per ounce, seemed to be the standard. 
Yet an ounce of such silver as that of the dollars coined before 
1772, was worth 6s. lofd.; was valued at 7s. in 1705. 

Copper Coins. — The English formerly had an aversion to cop- 
per coins, and used silver farthings and halfpence. Under Eliza- 
beth and long after, tradesmen and others cast lead tokens for 
change. Some copper farthings and half pence were coined under 
James I., Charles I. and Charles II., and many were issued under 
William III., and they became abundant under the Georges. 
But few reached New England previous to 1700, and they did 
not become plenty until 1749, when money was sent over to repay 
Massachusetts for the expenses of the Louisburg expedition, 
including 100 casks of coined farthings and halfpence, mostly the 
latter. Massachusetts, in 1750, ordered that they should pass 
at the rate of three farthings for a penny, and they were of the 
same value in an act of 1784. An English half penny was equal 
to two-thirds of a New England penny. As the English name, 
halfpennies, did not express their true value, it was given up, and 
they were called coppers. Merchants' books previous to the revo- 
lution showthat coppers were current at two-thirds of a penny each. 
The county court sometimes fixed the fare at ferries in coppers, in- 
stead of pence. The prices of many small things were in coppers.* 

*The old coppers, which had for some years been reduced to the value of half a penny, 
were no longer to pass as money after a certain day, in the spring of 1805. Congress had so 
ordered. It was an exciting time among the boys in some places, when the day approached, 
for many had treasured up a large number of coppers. They were disposed of to peddlers 
and traders. There was a brisk trade in Barlow pen-knives, raisins, fish-hooks, and knick- 
knacks. It was supposed that the "bungtown coppers," as they were called in this vicinity, 
had forever ceased to circulate, but some of them still remain. 


Taxation* in the 17th century. — Agricultural products, peltry, 
and other commodities, including the Indian shell-beads, called 
wampum, were the medium of trade in the British colonies for a 
long time. Money was seldom seen, except in and about com- 
mercial places. From 1640 to 1700, the farmers of Massachu- 
setts generally made their purchases, and paid their debts and 
taxes with the produce of their farms, and not with the precious 
metals. Common laborers, artificers, soldiers, representatives, 
school-masters, ministersf and magistrates were commonly paid 
for their services in something that was not money. There were 
exceptions in Boston, and some other towns near the coast, 
especially in the latter part of the 17th century. In the remote 
county of Hampshire, gold and silver were more scarce than in 
other parts of the colony. Very small as well as large sums were 
paid in produce. Church-members were under the necessity of 
paying the sacramental charges in wheat. | 

The produce currency continued until 1702, though partially 
interrupted by the colony bills, first issued in 1690 and 1691. The 
no-money currency was followed by the paper money currency, 
which continued about half a century. 

Taxes were formerly denominated Rates, and some kinds are 
still so called in England. In Massachusetts, there was the 
Country Rate, similar to the Province and State Tax of later 
times; the County Rate, to defray county charges; the Town Rate 
levied to discharge town debts; and the Minister's Rate, which 
was made and collected by itself. There were minor rates, in 
towns, as the herdsman's rate, the shepherd's rate, &c. 

A single country rate was ordinarily an assessment of one shil- 
ling and eight pence on males over 16 years of age, and of one 
penny per pound on real and personal estate. Each town was 
to make yearly a list of all male persons over 16, and a true esti- 
mate of all real and personal estate. Artificers and others who 
had higher wages than common laborers, were to be rated accord- 
ingly. This system of taxation, in many respects, resembled that 
of the present day. The polls paid a larger share of the tax than 
they now do. 

The expense of the government of Massachusetts, for 25 years 
previous to Philip's war in 1675, averaged between 1800 and 2000 

*Felt's "Statistics," Vol. I., give a History of Taxation in Massachusetts. 

•{•In 1657, all the ministers in old Suffolk county, except those of Boston, were paid in 
grain, other produce and labor, viz., the ministers of Roxbury, Dorchester, Braintree, Hing- 
ham, Weymouth, Dedliam and Medfield. 

jThe Northampton church voted in 1666 that each member should contribute towards 
the charge of the sacrament, three half pecks of wheat for a year. 

ampshire rates. 





23. I.I 


25. 0.8 





pounds a year, according to treasurers' accounts which remain. 
The greater part was paid in grain and other commodities, at 
provision pay prices. The expense of the Indian war was equal 
to that of 25 years of peace. From 1681 to 1685, the yearly ex- 
penditure was between 3000 and 4000 pounds, partly occasioned 
by the war. A small duty or impost on wines, strong waters and 
some other imported articles aided in defraying the public expenses. 

Early country rates in Hampshire. — In 1657, Springfield was rated in a single country 
rate, _£i2.i5.7, and Northampton, £9.9.9; in 1658, Springfield, £12.2.3, ^""^ Northampton, 
£12.2.3. ^^ those years, one country rate and one-fourth were levied. The freight of the 
grain, paid by the colony, amounted to near one-third of the rates. 

Hadley first appeared in the country rate in 1662. The single rate of that town was 
£21.14.0, Northampton, £21.15.0, Springfield, £16.14.0. One-fourth was added to these 
sums for a quarter rate. It cost the colony £4.16.9 to convey the grain of the Hadley rate 
to Boston. In 1663, Hadley agreed with the treasurer, to deliver the wheat for the rate in 
Hartford, at 5s. 6d. per bushel. 

1674. 1675 and 1676. 

£26.13.2 £26.5. S 

23. 8.6 22.2.10 

18. 2.5 18. 10.9 

12. II .7 II .16.0 

10. 17.2 8.12.0 

5. 0.6 

These towns paid so much on a single rate in these years. Hadley in 1670, before Hat- 
field was set off, was rated higher than Northampton, Springfield, Concord, and Hingham; 
and almost as high as Roxbury and Dedham. 

War Rates and Charges in Hampshire. — See page 182. — 10 
country rates were laid in 1675, 16 in 1676, 9 in 1677, 3 in 1678, 
5^ in 1679, and 4 in 1680, or 47J rates in 6 years. These rates 
were levied on nearly all the towns in the colony. 3I of them 
were money rates, to be paid in silver. About 36 rates were 
rendered necessary by the war. The Hadley country rates in 6 
years were not less than 870 pounds. 

The charges of the people of Hampshire against the colony, 
for supplies and services in the war, allowed by the government, 
are believed to have exceeded 5000 pounds, in country pay. The 
charges of Hadley exceeded 2000 pounds. The sum of 1900 
pounds due to the county in Oct. 1680, is not rightly proportioned 
on page 182. The sum due to Hadley was about iioo pounds, 
Hatfield, 450, Northampton, 200, Westfield, 140, Springfield, 
less than 10. 

The disbursements for the war, by the three colonies, on page 
181, were estimated as money. 

Money Rates. — The government of Massachusetts borrowed 
money to carry on the war, and purchased Maine for 1250 pounds 
in money.* Agents in England must have money, and there were 

*However cheap this may seem, it was a dear bargain to Massachusetts. 


Other calls. Some rates, payable in silver, were ordered in 1677 
and in succeeding years. These money rates did not trouble the 
Hampshire towns which the colony owed, but when the silver was 
actually demanded of any town, there was a great outcry. Spring- 
field, in May, 1685, sent a petition against the payment of rates in 
money. They said it was impossible to procure money, and 
desired the General Court to consider their remoteness from the 
Bay, and give them liberty to pay their country rates in corn, as 
formerly, "and no more require money of your moneyless peti- 
tioners." Suffield sent a doleful petition at the same time: — "We 
are forced to cry out, have pity on us, have mercy on us, forgive 
our last year's money rates. Oh, do not distress us, do not dis- 
tract your poor petitioners. Do not, for charity's sake, enjoin us 
to pay one penny more in money. Let it be enough for us to pay 
in corn, when we can raise it." The Court gave to these two 
towns liberty to pay money rates in corn at two-thirds of the coun- 
try pay prices. The deputies of Northampton and Hadley, 
Joseph Hawley and Samuel Partrigg, immediately requested the 
same liberty for all the other towns "in the remote county of Hamp- 
shire." The deputies granted it, but the magistrates refused, at 
that time. — In December, 1694, Hatfield chose two men, to join 
those from other towns in the county, at Springfield, and petition 
against money rates, "money not being to be had here." 

How Rates were paid in Hampshire, in the 17TH century. 

The County Rate was paid in grain, like that of the colony, and 
at the same price. 

The Minister's Rate, payable in grain at town prices, was 
given to the constable to collect. He had the accounts of those 
who had during the year, paid the minister wholly or partly in 
grain, meat, labor, or in any other way. He went to the inhab- 
itants, and received the balance of the rate in grain, and carried 
it to the minister. There was no delay; the collection was com- 
pleted in a short time, and the grain was deposited in the chamber 
of the minister. Chambers were the granaries in those days. 
The minister sent some of the grain to Boston to pay for books 
and goods. The old custom among ministers, of subsisting at 
each other's houses in their journeyings, was necessary as well as 
convenient. They had plenty of eatables, and could easily enter- 
tain a brother minister and his wife and others, but many of 
them had not money to pay inn-keepers. 

Town Rates were levied to pay the deputies' expenses, a part 
of the school-master's wages, for building bridges, killing wolves, 



ringing the bell, and many other services done for the town. No 
money was paid, and there was no town treasurer, and nothing 
for one to do. 

In Hadley, when a town rate was made, there was another 
paper with the names of all whom the town owed, and the sum 
due to each. The selectmen or constable made an adjustment 
with each person. If a man's credit was considerably more than 
his tax, his own rate was taken out, and those of some others 
with whom he had agreed, and the balance was paid to him in 
grain. Those who had little or no credit, paid their rates in 
grain, and by making turns with others whom the town owed. 
Thus the town rate was paid and the town debts discharged with- 
out much delay. 

It may be well to give some examples of the manner of paying 
town debts without money. 

In 1 68 1, Hadley owed Lieut. Philip 

Smith £9.17.10. He received his pay as 

follows: — 

His own rate, 

Part of Goodman Nash's rate, 

Nathaniel Smith's rate. 

Part of John Dickinson's rate, 

Joseph Baldwin, Jr.'s rate, 

Part of Capt. Cook's rate, 

Samuel Northam's rate. 

Part of Samuel Barnard's rate, 

Part of Wm. Webster's rate, 

i6| bushels peas at 2S. 6d. 

3^ " sum. wheat at 3s. 

winter wheat at 3s. 3d. I.I2. 6 
Indian corn at 2s. 1.17. o 

I. II. 






I . 










2. I . 




In 1684, the town owed Lieut. Samuel 
Smith £6.9.9, '"^'^ P^''^ him: — 

In his rate, £1 •I3- 8 

Nehemiah Dickinson's rate, 1.7 .4 

William Rooker's rate, 7 .11 

In corn (grain), 3. o .5^ 

By John Smith, 4J 

6. 9. 9 


More peas. 



In 1 68 1 the town owed Samuel Boltwood 
£3.16.3. He was paid in the same manner. 
By his own rate. 
His father Boltwood's rate. 
Part of rate on Lewis's land, 
Joseph Baldwin, sr's rate. 
Part of Joseph Hovey's rate, 
Part of Eliezer Hawk's rate. 
Part of Thomas Dickinson's rate, 
Paid Samuel Partrigg for S. B. 
Recording for S. B. 
11^ bushels Indian corn at 2s. 

In 1700, the town owed Widow 
Church 30 shillings and paid her:- 






0. 2. 


By her own rate. 





Part of Samuel Smith's rate. 





Moses Cook's rate, 





Samuel Church's rate, 




Stephen Taylor's rate, 




Josiah Church's rate. 




Part of Jos Church's rate. 





Part of Samuel Partrigg's rate. 



I- 3- 

3.16. 3 

The rates and debts in Hatfield were settled in the same way by 
grain and by exchanging debts against the town for rates against in- 
dividuals. Things were not very different in some parts of the colony. 


The town debts of Hadley continued to be balanced by grain 
until 1707, or later. In 1709, they were adjusted with money, 
that is, province bills. The people of Hampshire had had some 
pine-tree shillings, Spanish rials and pieces-of-eight, wampum, 
and perhaps a few colony bills, but their principal currency, since 
the settlement of these towns, had been the valuable but cum- 
brous products of their lands. That the paper money was a 
great relief to them after 1702, may be readily conceived. Yet 
after some years, the value of the bills was greatly lessened by 
excessive issues, and much mischief was produced. 

The industrious and frugal people of Massachusetts were mod- 
erately prosperous, both under the No-Money System, and the 
Too-much-money System, when not oppressed with the burdens 
and calamities of war. 

Grain* for taxes in the 17th century. — See page 94. — The 
prices fixed by Massachusetts and Connecticut for grain, when 
received for country rates, were much higher than the prices paid 
for grain in money. In most of the last twenty-three years of 
the century, in Massachusetts, and of the last twenty, in Con- 
necticut, one-third of the tax of every person that paid in money, 
was to be abated. The country prices of grain reduced one-third, 
were accounted money prices, or "pay as money," but were not 
real cash prices; they were in Massachusetts, as follows: — wheat, 
3s. 4d., barley, malt, peas and rye, 2s. 8d., Indian corn, 2s.; and in 
Connecticut,wheat,2s.8d. to 3s., peas and rye 2s., Indian corn, I s.8d. 

The town prices for grain inNorthampton, Hadley and Hatfield, 
for the payment of the town and minister's rates, were quite as 
low as the Massachusetts prices reduced one-third. And the 
money prices for grain in these towns were about twenty-five per 
cent, lower. There were so few money transactions in Hamp- 
shire that the real value of grain in silver can hardly be ascertained. 
Wheat at 2s. 6d., peas and rye, at 2s. and Indian corn, at is. 4d., 
were sometimes called money prices in Hadley. 

Madam Knight of Boston, who was in Connecticut in 1704, 
noticed three kinds of pay and corresponding prices: — 1st, pay, 
which was grain, pork, &c. at prices set by the General Court; 2d, 
pay as money, which was pay aforesaid, one-third cheaper than 
the prices set by the assembly; 3d, money, as pieces-of-eight, 
rials, Boston or Bay shillings, and Indian beads. The knife of 
a trader was 12 pence in pay, 8 pence in pay as money, and 6 
pence in money. 

♦Corn was the word used by our fathers for English grain, including peas, as it still is 
in England. The word grain, is not found in the Hadley records before 1692. 



HADLEY RATE, for building Fort River Bridge in 1681. Tlie rate was made in 
January, 1681-2. The 79 names of persons taxed are those of the heads of families, a few 
unmarried men, and some non-resident land-holders. The number of families did not 
exceed 60. The tax on a poll was 2s. 3d. The six highest taxes were those of Samuel 
Porter, Philip Smith, Samuel Partrigg, Aaron Cooke, Chileab Smith, and Peter Montague. 
The 23 lots on the east side of the street, omitting the small ones at the north end, and the 
20 lots on the west side, as originally granted, (see page 24,) are here numbered, from the 
top, on the east side, and from the bottom, on the west side, and most of the occupants in 
1 68 1 can be found. Many changes had taken place, and a number of the lots were occupied 
by tenants. 

West side of street. 

1 Lt. Joseph Kellogg, 
" Joseph Kellogg, Jr. 

2 Thomas Hale, 
WOIiam Markham, 
William Rooker, 

3 School Lot, (N. Ward's.) 

4 Samuel Moody, 

5 Jonathan Marsh, 
Daniel Marsh, 
Thomas Croft, 

6 Wm. Goodwin's lot. 

7 John Taylor, 

8 Timothy Nash, 
John Goodman, 

9 John Marsh, sr. 

10 Andrew Warner, 
Jacob Warner, 

1 1 Stephen Terry's lot. 
John Kellogg, 

12 Henry Clarke's land, 

Middle highway. 
Wm. Webster, 
Thomas Webster. 

13 Joseph Selding, 
Thomas Selding, 

14 Samuel Church, 
Martin Kellogg, 

15 Eliezer Hawks, 
Gershom Hawks, 

16 Joseph Barnard, 
Francis Barnard, 
Goodwife Barnard, 
Nathaniel Smith, 

17 Samuel Boltwood, 
Isaac Warner, 

18 Joseph Baldwin, sr. 
" Widpw of J. Baldwin, Jr. 

19 Chileab Smith, 

20 John Ingram, 
John Gardner, 
John Preston, 


John Cowles, 

Philip Russell, 

Thomas Loomis, 
On the record, the sum total of the 79 rates is £41.14.8. Not quite correct. 
I added those names and lots that have no tax against them. 

North lots. 



Robert Boltwood, 



Simon Beaman, 



Henry White, 



John Hayley, 



Joseph Warriner, 



East side of street. 

I Samuel Partrigg, 



2 Peter Montague, 



John Smith, 


3 John Warner, 



4 Lt. Philip Smith, 



5 John Montague, 



Joseph Smith, 



6 John Dickinson, 



7 Samuel Porter, 



8 Samuel Northam, 



Samuel fielding, sr. 


9 John Hubbard, 



10 Town lot. 

II Mr. John Russell. 

Middle highway. 

12 Samuel Barnard, 



13 Joseph Hovey, 



14 David Hoite, 



15 Samuel Lane, 


Timothy Wales, 



16 Nathaniel White, 



17 Mr. Peter Tilton, 



18 Mark Warner, 



Nathaniel Warner, 



Lewis land. 



19 Widow Goodman, 



20 Capt, Aaron Cooke, 



Andrew Leavens, 


21 Thomas Hovey, 



Thomas Elgarr, 



22 Nehemiah Dickinson, 



John Roberts, 



23 Samuel Smith, 



Edward Scott, 




Thomas Dickinson, 



Nathaniel Dickinson, 



Edward Church, 



Daniel Warner, 

































HADLEY RATE, for the town debts of 1686, maae in the early part of 1687. The 
number taxed was 82. The families had not increased in five years, and did not exceed 60. 
The tax on polls was 2s. id. The homelots are numbered as in 168 1-2. In placing the 
names on the old town rates, they began with those that lived at the north end, came down 
on the east side of the street, and went up on the west side. The names were arranged as 
the people lived, or by house-row. 

s. d. 
















West side of the street. 

1 Lieut. Jos. Kellogg, 
" Edward Kellogg, 
" Martin Kellogg, 

2 Thomas Hale, 
William Markham, 

3 School lot. 
John Kellogg, 

4 Samuel Moody, 

5 Jonathan Marsh, 
Daniel Marsh, 

6 Wm. Goodwin's lot. 

7 John Taylor, 

8 Timothy Nash, 

9 John Marsh, 

10 Widow of And. Warner, 
*' Jacob Warner, 

11 Widow of R. Goodman, 

12 Henry Clark's lot. 
Middle Highway. 

13 Joseph Selding, 
Thomas Selding, 

14 Widow of Sam'l Church, 

15 Gershom Hawks, 

16 Francis Barnard, 

17 Samuel Boltwood, 
Nathaniel Smith, 
Wm. Rooker, 
Joseph Hovey, 

18 Joseph Baldwin, (3d,) 
" Widow Baldwin, 

19 Chileab Smith, 
Sam. Smith, his son, 

20 John Ingram, 
Samuel Gardner, 
Nathaniel Warner, 
John Preston, 
Joseph Warriner, 

Eliezer Hawks, 
Thos. Dickinson, 
Mr. Jonathan Russell, 
John Hawks, 
Daniel Warner, 
Edward Church, 
John Cowles, 
Nathaniel Dickinson, 
Samuel Belding, sr. 
The aggregate of this tax is recorded as £41.8.2. Not quite exact. 
The rate for the debts of 1686, is the last that can be found for a great number of years. 
This and some preceding rates were recorded by Samuel Partrigg. His plain, legible hand 
ceases at Hadley in 1687. He removed to Hatfield. His son Samuel resided in Hadley, 

North lots. 



Joseph Smith, 
Simon Beaman, 





Isaac Warner, 



John Hayley, 



East side of the street. 

1 Samuel Partrigg, 

2 Peter Montague, 
John Smith's heirs, 






3 John Smith, 



Samuel Smith, son of Ph. 



4 Widow of Ph. Smith, 



" Philip Smith, 



Mr. George Stileman, 
5 Widow of R. Montague, 
John Montague, 
Thomas Croft, 




6 John Dickinson, 

7 Sarmiel Porter, sr. 





8 Hezekiah Porter, 



9 Daniel Hubbard, 



10 Town lot. 

1 1 Mr. John Russell, 



Middle Highway. 
12 Samuel Barnard, 



13 Bacon's lot. 

14 John Smith, son of Philip, 



15 Samuel Porter, Jr. 



16 Nathaniel White, 



Nathaniel Goodwin, 



Joseph Chamberlain, 



17 Mr. Peter Tilton, 



John Lawrence, 
18 Lewis land. 



19 John Goodman, 



20 Capt. Aaron Cooke, 
Andrew Leavens, 



21 Thomas Hovey, 

22 Nehemiah Dickinson, 




23 Samuel Smith, sr. 



" Mrs. Dorothy Russell, 

Young men. 

Thomas Coleman, 




Thomas Elgarr, 
Simon Smith, 




Eleazar Warner, 































Changes in Hadley. — Notices follow of some of the changes in the owners and occupiers 
of homelots in Hadley, from 1663 to 1687. The names of the proprietors in 1663 are on 
page 24. The names of owners and dwellers in 1681 and 1687, are in the lists of persons 
taxed, on pages 203 and 204. Many homelots remained in the same family till after 1687; 
these La general are not noticed. 

The north dwellers. 

Robert Boltwood was at the mill in 1681, but was not taxed for the mill. John Clary 
was at the mill in 1684. Joseph Smith, cooper, began to have the care of the mill, Nov. 

Isaac Harrison built a house on his lot next to the river. His widow married Henry 
White, who lived in the same house some years, but removed to Deerfield. Joseph Smith 
bought the house and lot, 1685, for 33 pounds. 

William Gaylord, in 1672, bought for 20 pounds, the western lot of the four, adjoining 
Partrigg's houselot on the north, with a house. It was a triangular lot, first granted to 
AdamNichoUs, and contained three acres. Two acres, on page 24, is a mistake. Gaylord's 
widow married John Haley. This houselot belonged to the Gaylords for a long time. 

John Taylor had the lot next east, (and not John Ingram, as on page 24.) He sold the 
lot and house to Doct. John Westcarr, and bought John Webster's homestead. Doct. 
Westcarr's widow married Simon Beaman; they removed to Deerfield, and George Stile- 
man, or Stillman, bought the lot and house in 1687. 

John Ingram had the lot east of Taylor's, and retained it, but he bought a part of Sam- 
uel Gardner's place, and lived there. 

William Pixley had the lot east of Ingram's. He removed to Northampton, and the lot 
long remained without a resident. 

Joseph Warriner had a lot in the street, near the north end. 

East side of the street. 

Peter Montague married the widow of Noah Coleman, and lived on the Coleman house- 

John Warner from Brooklield, lived some years on Lt. Samuel Smith's lot. In 1687, 
John Smith, orphan, son of John Smith who was slain in 1676, and Samuel Smith, son of 
Philip, owned the lot, and lived on it. 

Joseph Smith lived on John Dickinson's lot from 1681 to 1685, and Thomas Croft, in 
1687. This second John Dickinson removed to Wethersfield. 

The widow of Thomas Wells married Samuel Belding of Hatfield, and he was taxed for 
her estate. Samuel Northam bought half the houselot. He removed to Deerfield, and 
Samuel Porter bought this half and Hezekiah Porter lived on it, 1687. Widow Porter 
bought the other half of the Wells lot. 

John Hubbard removed to Hatfield, and his son Daniel lived on his place in Hadley. 

The town houselot was vacant, 1681 and 1687. 

Mr. Russell was taxed in 1687. 

Samuel Barnard had of his father, Francis B., the lot that had been John Barnard's. 

The Bacon lot and the two Stanley lots were long occupied by tenants. John Smith, 
son of PhUip, owned Nathaniel Stanley's lot in 1686. Samuel Porter owned Thomas Stan- 
ley's lot, and his son Samuel lived on it in 1686. Some years later, Lieut. Nehemiah Dick- 
inson purchased Andrew Bacon's lot. The tenants, Joseph Hovey, David Hoyt, Samuel 
Lane and Timothy Wales removed. Hoyt went to Deerfield and Lane to Sufl5eld. Per- 
haps Hovey was an owner for a time. 

Mark and Nathaniel Warner, sons of John W., appear to have lived some years in the 
house of William Lewis, he having removed to Farmington. Mark settled in Northamp- 
ton. Daniel Marsh seems to have purchased the Lewis lot. 

Thomas Hovey purchased Thomas Dickinson's houselot in 1679. Dickinson removed 
to Wethersfield. 

Samuel Smith, son of Rev. Henry Smith of Wethersfield, lived on the lot of his mother, 
the widow of John Russell, sr. 

West side of the street. 

Thomas Hale had a part of Markham's houselot, having married one of Markham's 
daughters. He removed to Enfield. — William Rooker lived on Markham's lot and else- 


Nathaniel Ward's house was occupied by the Hopkins School, and sometimes had a 
family in it. John Kellogg seems to have lived in this house some time. 

John Crow removed to Hartford. Jonathan and Daniel Marsh purchased his lot. 
Some years after, Daniel lived on the lot of his father, John Marsh. 

William Goodwin removed to Farmington. John Crow had his houselot, and his son 
Samuel Crow lived on it; Samuel's two children, Samuel and Mary, had the lot. 

John Taylor bought John Webster's houselot. 

The widow of Richard Goodman owned the lot that had belonged to her father, Stephen 

Henry Clarke's lot was purchased by Rev. John Russell. Was sold by Rev. Jonathan 
Russell to Aaron Cooke. 

William and Thomas Webster lived in small houses in the middle highway. 

Edward Church removed to Hatfield. Sold his houselot to Joseph and Thomas Selding, 
or Selden, sons of Thomas Selding of Hartford, deceased. 

Eleazar Hawks removed to Deerfield. Gershom died in a few year": Nathaniel Kellogg 
bought the Hawks lot. 

Joseph Barnard, who had lived with his father, Francis B., removed to Deerfield. 
"Goodwife Barnard" had been wife of John Dickinson and owned some of his estate. 

Isaac Warner lived on a corner of Boltwood's lot many years. Was taxed at the north 
end in 1687. He removed up the river. 

John Ingram owned a part of Samuel Gardner's lot. 

John Preston had a small lot and house adjoining Gardner. 

Most of the non-residents that were taxed, resided in Hatfield. 

These heads of families remained in Hadley a few years, and removed before 1687, viz., 
James Beebee, Edward Grannis, Mr. John Younglove, John Catlin and John Clary, Jr. 
John Lawrence resided in Hadley some years, and removed after 1687. A single man 
named Thomas Aacy lived in Hadley some years. 


Generals Whalley and GofFe — Hutchinson's Account — President Stiles's History — The 
Russell house and the Judges' chamber. 

The appearance of Gen. GofFe at Hadley, Sept. i, 1675, when 
the Indians attacked the place, is noticed on pages 137-139, with 
some remarks of President Stiles. His supposition, that the 
people in the meeting-house were "suddenly surrounded and 
surprised by a body of Indians," must be unfounded. The 
Indians, with a defenceless village a mile in length before them, 
would not have surrounded a building which contained thirty or 
forty armed men. The attack was undoubtedly upon the out- 
skirts of the town, probably at the north end. The approach of 
the Indians may have been observed by Goffe from his chamber, 
which had a window towards the east. There is no reason to 
believe that there was a very large body of Indians, but the people, 
being entirely unaccustomed to war, needed GofFe to arrange and 
order them. The Indians appear to have fled, after a short skir- 

The R II s s e I, l C ii i i ' ii a n ij 1 1 i - i k l 
The latter occupies the site of the home of Rev. Joliu Russell, in which the regicides were sheltered 

Old Academy B i' i l d i n <■ , Built in i 8 i 7 


Edward Whalley was brought up to merchandize. When the 
contest began between king Charles and the padiament, he, in 
middle life, took up arms in defence of the liberty of the subject, 
and distinguished himself in many sieges and battles. He was 
a cousin of Oliver Cromwell. Noble says, "from a merchant's 
counter, to rise to so many and so high offices in the state, and to 
conduct himself with propriety in them, sufficiently evinces that 
he had good abilities, nor is his honesty questioned by any." 

William Goffe was a son of Rev. Stephen Goffe, a puritan 
divine, rector of Stanmore in Sussex. He left the counter when 
a young man, repaired to the parliament army, and his merit 
raised him to be a colonel of foot, and afterwards a general, and 
a member of parliament. His wife who was Whalley's daughter, 
he left in England, and he kept up a constant correspondence 
v/ith her while in exile in New England. His last letter to her is 
dated at Hadley in 1679. 

Both Whalley and Goffe were of the sixty-seven judges who 
passed sentence upon king Charles I. and of the fifty-nine who 
signed his death warrant, Jan. 29, 1649. When the restoration 
of Charles H. was determined, they found it necessary to escape 
from England. 

Governor Hutchinson was in possession of Goffe's diary and his 
papers and letters, which had long been in the library of the Math- 
ers in Boston. Hutchinson was a tory, and his house was rifled 
by a mob in 1765, and the Journal of Goffe and other papers relat- 
ing to the judges are supposed to have been destroyed. From 
them he had published in 1764, a short Account of Whalley and 
Goffe, in his first volume of the History of Massachusetts. Some 
extracts are subjoined: — 

"In the ship which arrived at Boston from London, the 27th of July, 1660, there came 
passengers, Colonel Whalley and Colonel Goffe, two of the late King's Judges. Colonel 
Goffe brought testimonials from Mr. John Row and Mr. Seth Wood, two ministers of a 
church in Westminster. Colonel Whalley had been a member of Mr. Thomas Goodwin's 
church. Goffe kept a journal or diary, from the day he left Westminster, May 4, until the 
year 1667; which together with several other papers belonging to him, I have in my pos- 
session. Almost the whole is in characters, or short hand, not difficult to decypher. The 
story of these persons has never yet been published to the world. They did not attempt to 
conceal their persons or characters when they arrived at Boston, but immediately went to 
the Governor, Mr. Endicot, who received them very courteously. They were visited by the 
principal persons of the town; and among others, they take notice of Colonel Crown's com- 
ing to see them. He was a noted Royalist. Although they did not disguise themselves, 
yet they chose to reside at Cambridge, a village about four miles distant from the town, 
where they went the first day they arrived. They went publicly to meetings on the Lord's 
day, and to occasional lectures, fasts, and thanksgivings, and were admitted to the sacra- 
ment, and attended private meetings for devotion, visited many of the principal towns, and 
were frequently at Boston; and once when insulted there, the person who insulted them was 
bound to his good behavior. They appeared grave, serious and devout; and the rank they 


had sustained commanded respect. Whalley had been one of Cromwell's Lieutenant- 
Generals, and Goffe a Major-General. The reports, by way of Barbadoes, were that all 
the Judges would be pardoned but seven. When it appeared that they were not excepted, 
some of the principal persons in the Government were alarmed; pity and compassion pre- 
vailed with others. They had assurances from some that belonged to the General Court, 
that they would stand by them, but were advised by others to think of removing. The 22d 
of February, 1661, the Governor summoned a Court of Assistants, to consult about securing 
them, but the Court did not agree to it. Finding it unsafe to remain any longer, they left 
Cambridge the 26th following, and arrived at New Haven the 7th of March, 1661. One 
Captain Breedan, who had seen them at Boston, gave information thereof upon his arrival 
in England. A few days after their removal, a hue and cry, as they term it in their diary, 
was brought by the way of Barbadoes; and thereupon a warrant to secure them issued, the 
8th of March from the Governor and Assistants, which was sent to Springfield and other 
towns in the western part of the colony; but they were beyond the reach of it." 

The Governor adds in a long marginal note, "They were well treated at New-Haven by 
the ministers, and some of the magistrates, and for some days seemed to apprehend them- 
selves out of danger. But the news of the King's proclamation being brought to New-Haven, 
they were obliged to abscond. The 27th of March they removed to Milford, and appeared 
there in the day time, and made themselves known; but at night returned privately to New- 
Haven, and lay concealed in Mr. Davenport the minister's house, until the 30th of April. 
About this time news came to Boston, that ten of the Judges were executed, and the Gov- 
ernor received a royal mandate, dated March 5, 1660-61, to cause Whalley and Goffe to be 
secured. This greatly alarmed the country, and there is no doubt that the court were now 
in earnest in their endeavors to apprehend them: and to avoid all suspicion, they gave com- 
mission and instruction to two young merchants from England. Thomas Kellond and Thomas 
Kirk, zealous royalists, to go through the colonies, as far as Manhados [New York] in search 
of them. They had friends who informed them what was doing, and they removed from Mr. 
Davenport's to the house of William Jones, where they lay hid until the nth of May, and 
then removed to a mill, and from thence, on the 13th into the woods, where they met Jones 
and two of his companions, Sperry and Burril, who first conducted them to a place called 
Hatchet-Harbour, where they lay two nights, until a cave or hole in the side of a hUl was 
prepared to conceal them. This hill they called Providence-Hill : and there they continued 
from the 15th of May to the nth of June, sometimes in the cave, and in very tempestuous 
weather, in a house near to it. During this time the messengers went through New-Haven 
to the Dutch settlement, from whence they returned to Boston by water. They made dil- 
igent search, and had full proof that the regicides had been seen at Mr. Davenport's, and 
offered great rewards to English and Indians who should give information, that they might 
be taken; but by the fidelity of their three friends they remained undiscovered. Mr. Dav- 
enport was threatened with being called to an account, for concealing and comforting trait- 
ors, and might well be alarmed. They had engaged to surrender, rather than the country 
or any particular persons should suffer upon their account: and upon intimation of Mr. 
Davenport's danger, they generously resolved to go to New-Haven, and deliver themselves 
up to the authority there. They let the Deputy-Governor, Mr. Leete know where they 
were; but he took no measures to secure them; and the next day some persons came to them 
to advise them not to surrender. Having publicly shewn themselves at New-Haven, they 
had cleared Mr. Davenport from the suspicion of still concealing them, and the 24th 
of June went into the woods again to their cave. They continued there, sometimes ventur- 
ing to a house near the cave, until the 19th of August — when the search for them being 
pretty well over they ventured to the house of one Tomkins, near Milford meeting-house, 
where they remained two years, without so much as going into the orchard. After that, 
they took a little more liberty, and made themselves known to several persons in whom they 
could confide, and each of them frequently prayed, and also exercised, as they termed it, 
or preached at private meetings in their chamber. In 1664, the commissioners from King 
Charles arrived at Boston — Upon the news of it, they retired to their cave, where they 
tarried eight or ten days. Soon after, some Indians in their hunting, discovered the cave 
with the bed; and the report being spread abroad, it was not safe to remain near it. On 
the 13th of October, 1664, they set out for Hadley, near an hundred miles distant, travelling 
only by night; where Mr. Russel, the minister of the place, had previously agreed to receive 
them. Here they remained concealed fifteen or sixteen years, very few persons in the col- 


ony being privy to it. The last account of Goffe, is from a letter, dated Ehenezer, the name 
they gave their several places of abode, April 2, 1679. Whalley had been dead some time 
before. The tradition at Hadley is, that two persons unknown, were buried in the minis- 
ter's cellar. The minister was no sufferer by his boarders. They received more or less 
remittances every year, for many years together, from their wives in England. Those few 
persons who knew where they were, made them frequent presents. Richard Saltonstall, 
Esq. who was in the secret, when he left the country and went to England in 1672, made 
them a present of fifty pounds at his departure; and they take notice of donations from 
several other friends. They were in constant terror, though they had reason to hope after 
some years, that the enquiry for them was over. They read with pleasure the news of their 
being killed, with other judges, in Switzerland. Their diary for six or seven years, contains 
every little occurrence in the town, church, and particular families in the neighborhood. 
They had indeed, for five years of their lives, been among the principal actors of the great 
affairs of the nation. They had very constant and exact intelligence of every thing which 
passed in England, and were unwilling to give up all hopes of deliverance. Their greatest 
expectations were from the fulfilment of the prophecies. They had no doubt, that the 
execution of the Judges was the slaying of the witnesses. They were much disappointed, 
when the year 1666 had passed without any remarkable event, but flattered themselves that 
the Christian aera might be erroneous. Their lives were miserable and constant burdens. 
They complain of being banished from all human society. A letter from Goffe 's wife, who 
was Whalley's daughter, I think worth preserving. After the second year, Goffe writes by 
the name of Walter Goldsmith, and she of Frances Goldsmith; and the correspondence is 
carried on, as between a mother and son. There is too much religion in their letters for the 
taste of the present day: but the distresses of two persons, under these peculiar circumstances, 
who appear to have lived very happily together, are very strongly described. 

Whilst they were at Hadley, February 10, 1664-5, John Dixwell, another of the Judges, 
came to them; but from whence, or in what part of America he first landed, is not known. 
He continued some years at Hadley, and then removed to New-Haven. He married at 
New-Haven, and left several children. After his death, his son came to Boston, and lived 
in good repute; was a ruling elder of one of the churches there, and died in 1725. Colonel 
Dixwell was buried in New-Haven. 

It cannot be denied, that many of the principal persons in the colony greatly esteemed 
these persons for their professions of piety, and their grave deportment, who did not approve 
of their political conduct. After they v/ere declared traitors, they certainly would have been 
sent to England, if they could have been taken. It was generally thought that they had left 
the country; and even the consequence of their escape was dreaded, lest when they were 
taken, those who had harbored them should suffer for it. Randolph, who was sent to search, 
could obtain no more knowledge of them, than that they had been in the country, and re- 
spect had been shewn them by some of the Magistrates. I am loth to omit an anecdote 
handed down through Governor Leverett's family. I find Goffe takes notice in his journal 
of Leverett's being at Hadley.— [This anecdote is on page 138.] 

Rev. Ezra Stiles, president of Yale College, published "A 
History of three of the Judges of King Charles I.," Whalley, GofFe 
and Dixwell, in 1794, and dedicated it "to all the patrons of real, 
perfect and unpolluted liberty." He collected a great abundance 
of traditionary information from the towns about New Haven, 
and from Hadley. — He found that the Providence Hill of Whalley 
and Goffe was West Rock, about two and a half miles north- 
west of New Haven; and that their cave was not in the side of the 
hill, but in a pile of rocks on the top of West Rock. 

The judges were not out of danger while secreted at Hadley, 
as public inquiry was made after them by men sent from England. 


They led so recluse and concealed a life at Hadley, that there are 
few anecdotes concerning them while there. They were well 
supplied with means of subsistence, partly from England and 
partly from friends here. Peter Tilton was often at Boston and 
donations could be safely made through him, and the judges 
sometimes resided at his house. Goffe thus wrote to his wife 
respecting her superannuated father, Whalley, in August, 1674: — 

''He is scarce capable of any rational discourse, his understanding, memory and speech 
do so much fail him, and he seems not to take much notice of any thing that is either said 
or done, but patiently bears all things and never complains of any thing. The common 
question is to know how he doth, and his answer for the most part is, very well, I praise God. 
He has not been able of a long time to dress, undress or feed himself, without help; it is a 
great mercy to him that he has a friend who takes pleasure in being helpful to him." 

Whalley died in Hadley not far from 1676, and GefFe's last 
letter is dated April 2, 1679, ^^^ ^^ ^^^Y have died as early as 
1680. It is certain that Whalley died in Hadley, and there is 
very little doubt that Goffe died there also. The tradition, con- 
cerning which President Stiles enlarges, that Whalley or Goffe, 
or both, were buried at New Haven, seems to be fabulous. Pres. 
S. believed that both died in Hadley, and that Whalley was buried 
at Russell's and Goffe at Tilton's. The surmise of some, that 
their bodies were removed from Hadley to New Haven, is cer- 
tainly false, in regard to Whalley, and it is believed to be equally 
unfounded as to Goffe. The necessity of secrecy would have 
prevented the removal, as it must have been done by oxen and 
cart. The bones of Whalley had not been found when Pres. 
Stiles wrote his History in 1793. 

The following letter from Rev. Samuel Hopkins of Hadley, to 
President Stiles, contains various traditions, some of which must 
be rejected. The time of Peter Tilton's death, which Mr. Hop- 
kins could not find, was July 11, 1696. 

Hadley, March 26, 1793. 
"Reverend Sir, 

Since I received yours of the nth ult. I have taken pains to enquire of the oldest people 
among us, what they heard said, by the eldest persons in town since their remembrance, 
respecting Whalley and Goffe, their residence in this town. The tradition among all of 
them is, that both of them were secreted in the town; that the inhabitants at that time knew 
very little of them, or where they were concealed, except those in whose houses they were. 
And the tradition among them in general is, that one of them died in this town (those who 
remember which, say Whalley) — that the other, Goffe, after the death of Whalley, left the 
town, and that it was not known where he went. With respect to the one who died in this 
town, the tradition in general is, that he was buried in Mr. Tillton's cellar. 

Most of whom I have enquired for tradition say, that while they were here the Indians 
made an assault upon the town: that on this occasion a person unknown appeared, anima- 
ting^and leading on the inhabitants against the enemy, and exciting them by his activity and 


ardour; that when the Indians were repulsed, the stranger disappeared — was gone — none 
ever knew where, or who he was. The above is the general tradition among us. 

I shall now notice some things which were in the tradition, as given by some, differing 
from the above, or adding somewhat to it. 

According to the tradition given by some, Whalley and Gofle were not concealed the 
whole of the time at Mr. Russell's and Mr. Tillton's, but part of the time at one Smith's.* 
This I find in the family of the Smiths. 

An old man among us says, he remembers to have heard the old people say, there was a 
fruitless search (by order of the government, as I understand it) of all the houses in Hadley; 
but that they (to use his words) searched as if they searched not. That after Whalley 's death, 
Goffe went off, first to Hartford, afterwards to New-Haven, where he was suspected and in 
danger of being known, by his extraordinary dexterity with the sword; shown (as he tells 
the story) on a particular occasion. And in apprehension of danger, he went off from New- 
Haven. Here tradition, according to him, ends with respect to Goffe. 

Another, still older says, that he heard both his father and his grandfather say, that Whalley 
and Goffe were both secreted at Mr. Russell's at first; who for their security, in case of 
search, made a retreat for them between his chambers, and behind his chimney. That one 
of them died at Mr. Tillton's and was buried behind his barn. That after his death Goffe 
went off into tlie Narragansett; was there set upon, and in danger of being taken; went from 
thence to the southward; was heard of as far as Pennsylvania, or Virginia, and nothing heard 
further of him. 

The tradition among some, connected with the family of the Marshes, is, that Whalley 
and Goffe both died in Hadley. 

Not many years after my settlement in Hadley, (1754) one, who was then quite an old 
man, told me, among other things, that the tradition of the one that died in town was, that 
he was buried in Mr. Tillton's garden, or in his cellar. With respect to the place of his burial, 
I am of opinion, that it was kept secret, and was unknown. It seems to have been a matter 
of conjecture among the inhabitants; — in Tillton's cellar, — in his garden — or behind his 
barn — as they imagined most probable. Of his being buried under a fence between two 
lots, I do not find any thing; — nor of his being afterwards removed. I have searched for his 
monument, and do not as yet by any means find the time of Tillton's death. Should I here- 
after, I will inform you. 


Extracts from Stiles's History of the Judges. 

I was at Hadley, May 21, 1792. The reverend Mr. Hopkins carried me to Mr. Russell's 
house, still standing. It is a double house, two stories and a kitchen. Although repaired 
with additions, yet the chamber of the Judges remains obviously in its original state unmuti- 
lated, as when these exiled worthies inhabited it. Adjoining to it behind, or at the north 
end of the large chimney, was a closet, in the floor of which I saw still remaining the trap 
door, through which they let themselves down into an under closet, and so thence descended 
into the cellar for concealment, in case of search or surprise. I examined all those places 
with attention, and with heart-felt sympathetic veneration for the memories of those long 
immured sufferers, thus shut up and secluded from the world for the tedious space of four- 
teen or sixteen years, in this voluntary Bastile. They must have been known to the family 
and domestics; and must have been frequently exposed to accidental discoveries, with all 
their care and circumspection to live in stillness. That the whole should have been effec- 
tually concealed in the breasts of the knowing ones, is a scene of secrecy truly astonishing! 

On my return from Hadley, passing through Wethersfield, on the 25th of May, I visited 
Mrs. Porter, a sensible and judicious woman, aged 77. She was a daughter of Mr. Ebenezer 
Marsh, and born at Hadley, 171 5, next door to Mr. Tillton's, one of the temporary and in- 
terchanged residences of the Judges. This house was in her day occupied by deacon Joseph 
Eastman. She had the general siory of the Judges, but said she knew nothing with cer- 
tainty concerning them, but only that it was said they sometimes lived at Mr. Russell's, and 

*Lieut. Samuel Smith is meant. 



sometimes where deacon Eastman lived. That one was buried in Mr. Russell's cellar, and 
another in Mr. Tillton's lot. As she said she had nothing certain, I pressed her for fab- 
ulous anecdotes. She said she was ashamed to tell young people's whims and notions. 
But in the course of conversation she said, that when she was a girl, it was the constant 
belief among the neighbors, that an old man, for some reason or other, had been buried 
in the fence between deacon Eastman's and her father's. She said the women and girls 
from their house and deacon Eastman's used to meet at the dividing fence, and while 
chatting and talking together for amusement, one and another at times would say, with a 
sort of skittish fear and laughing, "who knows but what we are now standing on the old 
man's grave ?" She and other girls used to be skittish and fearful, even in walking the street, 
when they came against the place of that supposed grave; though it was never known 
whereabouts in that line of fence it lay. She supposed the whole was only young folks' 
foolish notions; for some were much concerned lest the old man's ghost should appear at 
or about that grave. But this lady was very reluctant at narrating these circumstances 
and stories, to which she gave no heed herself. 

In repeatedly visiting Hadley for many years past, and in conversation with persons 
born and brought up in Hadley, but settled elsewhere, I have often perceived a concurrent 
tradition that both died there, and were buried somewhere in Hadley unknown, though 
generally agreeing that one was buried at Russell's. 

Mr. Russell's Dwelling House. 

Stiles's History contains a representation of the outlines of the 
house, and of the Judges' Chamber. The following is an im- 
perfect copy, made without the aid of an engraver. 

Kitchen. 3 



1 1 

The Judges' 
Chamber, 1665. 

Middle Highway. 

One part of the house was built as early as 1660, and the town 
aided Mr. Russell to build an addition in 1662. It appears from 
the inventory of Mr. Russell's estate in 1693, that the north, or 
kitchen part of the house, had a kitchen, lodging room, buttery 
and closet, with chambers over them; also a study; and that the 
south part had two lower rooms, named hall and parlor, with hall 


and parlor chambers over them; and a great and Httle cellar* and 
garrets, are mentioned. Furniture and other articles were ap- 
praised in all these rooms. 

The town purchased of Rev. Samuel Russell of Branford, in 
1694, the house and the old homelot of 8 acres, and 4 acres added 
to the east end of this lot and the town lot, to extend them to the 
bank, making 12 acres, for 120 pounds, or about 400 dollars in 
money. The town gave the buildings and ten acres to their second 
minister, Mr. Isaac Chauncey, in 1696. His son, Josiah Chauncey, 
sold the same homestead in 1749, to Samuel Gaylord, who resided 
upon it, as did his son, Samuel Gaylord; and his grandson, 
Chester Gaylord, still owns the western half of the lot, and lives 
upon it. 

Chester Gaylord was born in 1782, and is now (April, 1858) in 
his 76th year. The following information is derived from him: — 
Before he was born, his father took down the north or kitchen 
part of the Russell house, and rebuilt it in nearly the same place, 
two stories high in the front westward, and one in the rear,f and 
the old cellar remained. The south building, in his younger 
years, remained apparently in its original state. He judges that 
it was 42 or 44 feet in length and about 20 feet in width. There 
was no cellar under it. The south side was the front. It had 
two large rooms below, with an old fashioned chimney and a 
front entry and stairs between them. Above were two spacious 
chambers, and overhead appeared the joists and garret-floor, 
whitewashed; and Mr. G. thinks the walls were boarded and not 
plastered, but is not certain. North of the chimney, was an en- 
closed place with two doors, used as a passage between the cham- 
bers and for other purposes. The floor boards of this passage 
or closet were laid from the chimney to the north side, and the 
ends went under the boards that enclosed the apartment. One 
board, at least, was not fastened down, and it could be slipped 
two or three inches to the north or south, and one end could then 
be raised up.j! Mr. G., when a boy, had many times raised this 
board and let himself down into the space below, and restored the 
board to its place above him. He was then in a dark hole, which 
had no opening into any of the lower rooms; if there was once a 
passage into the kitchen cellar, it had been closed. There is a 

*The great and little cellar were only one cellar, divided by a partition, and it was not 

"{"President Stiles understood that the house had been "repaired with additions." 
jThe trap door which Pres. Stiles saw in May, 1792, could have been nothing else but 
this board. It was not such a trap door as is pictured in his plan of the house. 


tradition that tiie judges were once concealed in this dark place 
behind the chimney, when searchers went through the passage 
above. They could easily lift the board, and hide themselves 
in this under closet. 

The south part of the Russell house was pulled down when Mr. 
Gaylord was about 13 years old, or in 1795, and the present house 
was built, which is 44 by 40 feet, and extends above 20 feet farther 
south than the old one. The kitchen part was all north of this, 
and Mr. Gaylord's father and his family lived in it, while he was 
building the new house. As the stones of the old cellar wall were 
needed for the new cellar, the building was supported by props in 
part, and the wall removed. In taking down the middle part of 
the front wall, next to the main street, the workmen discovered, 
about 4 feet below the top of the ground, a place where the earth 
was loose, and a little search disclosed flat stones, a man's bones, 
and bits of wood. Almost all the bones were in pieces, but one 
thigh bone was whole, and there were two sound teeth. Doct. 
S. H. Rogers, who then resided in Hadley, examined the thigh 
bone, and said it was the thigh bone of a man of large size. This 
and the other bones were laid on a shelf, and in a short time they 
all crumbled into small pieces, and were not preserved. John 
Hopkins took the teeth, and he gave away one or both. No other 
grave was found behind the cellar wall. Mr. G. supposes the 
flat stones, from their position, were laid on the top of the coffin. 

These bones must have been those of Gen. Whalley, who was 
buried near 120 years before. Perhaps he died before Mr. 
Russell began to entertain the officers in the Indian war in 1675. 
If so, only Goffe removed to Mr. Tilton's. 

On the i8th of May, 1680, Sir Edmund Andros wrote from 
New York, to the Governor and Assistants of Connecticut, that 
he had been informed that Col. Goff'e was kept and concealed by 
Capt. Joseph Bull and his sons at Hartford, under the name of 
Mr. Cooke. Warrants were issued to the constables of Hartford, 
directing them to search diligently the buildings of Joseph Bull 
and sons, and other places. They did not find Col. Gofi^e nor 
any suspected stranger. Secretary Allyn wrote to Gov. Andros, 
June II, 1680, desiring the names of the informers, and said the 
people of Hartford were much abused by these false reports. 

President Stiles was an ardent republican, and believed that criminal kings should be 
tried and punished, as well as other men. He said in conclusion: — 

"The enlightened, upright and intrepid judges of Charles I. will hereafter go down to 
posterity with increasing renown, among the Jepthas, the Baraks, the Gideons, and the 
Washingtons, and others raised up by providence for great and momentous occasions: whose 
memories, with those of all the other successful and unsuccessful, but intrepid and patriotic 


defenders of real liberty, will be selected in history, and contemplated with equal, impartial 
and merited justice: and whose names, and achievements, and sufferings will be trans- 
mitted with honor, renown, and glory, through all the ages of liberty and of man." 

Mr. Tilton's letter to his wife. — The following letter, published by Hutchinson, though 
not relating to the judges, may be inserted with propriety in the History of Hadley. It is 
occupied chiefly with foreign affairs, and furnishes another example of the manner in which 
European news was spread in this country, before newspapers were printed here. 

Boston, i8 3 mo. [May i8,] 1672. 
"Dear Wife, 

This opportunity gives occasion of these lines; we have had a quiet and peaceable election, 
no alteration or addition. O what a price doth Divine Patience yet betrust us with, when 
he is drawing out the sword and arraying himself with the garments of vengeance as to 
other kingdoms, and when it is more than probable many garments are tumbling in blood. 
As to the news from England, all men, both wise and others of more ordinary capacities, 
look on the effect or produce thereof will be as black a day in the world, as the world hath 
known. The late actions in England in commissioning their fleet to seize and fall on the 
Hollanders, of which I wrote you in my last, breaking their league, joining with the French, 
assisting them with soldiers out of England, and with their principal harbors to receive a 
numerous army, and shutting up the exchequer, whereby many are outed of their estates 
contrary to all law, are things that both in England and here, by men of all sorts, are looked 
upon as strange, horrid, and ominous. There is another ship expected, one Jonas Clarke, 
if not stopped by the embargo or otherwise, in which one Dr. Hoare, a minister, is expected. 
Remember me to mine and thine, with my love to all with you. I cannot forget you before 
the Father of Spirits night and day. The good wUl of Him that dwelt in the bush be with 
you, cause his face to shine upon you all, and give you peace. So prayeth still. 

Yours unfeignedly to love, 


Mr. TUton's letter has a postcript, chiefly relating to a fast appointed by the General 
Court for themselves, to be on the "fourth day," (Wednesday) of the next week. Mr. 
TUton wrote to his family: — "My dear ones, forget not him who hath you all on his heart, 
and whose desire it is to leave himself and his all, with that merciful high-priest who hath 
the keys of life and death. Farewell. Farewell." 


The MUitia and their postures and arms — Hadley militia — Hampshire Troop — Change in 
fire-arms— New Militia Law — New Military book — Bayonets — Colors — Calling the 
roll — Watches — Alarms. 

Militia companies in Massachusetts and Connecticut were 
organized and armed in nearly the same manner as soldiers in 
England. "TheCompleat Body of the Art Military," by Lieut. 
Col. Richard Elton, was published before 1649, and a Supple- 
ment by another was published with it in London, 1668. Many 
persons in New England had Elton's book. Major John Pynchon 
had one; and Capt. Aaron Cooke of Northampton had one, 
which he gave in his will, to his son, Capt. Aaron Cooke of Had- 
ley. The manner in which our fathers performed the manual 
exercise, with the matchlock musket and rest, may be learned 
from what Elton calls "The Postures of the Musket," in the 
edition of 1668. 



The Postures of the Musket, 

Stand to your arms. 

Take up your bandoleers. 

Put on your bandoleers. 

Take up your match. 

Place your match. 

Take up your rest. 

Put the string of your rest about your left 

Take up your musket. 
Rest your musket. 
Poise your musket. 
Shoulder your musket. 
Unshoulder your musket and poise. 
Join your rest to the outside of your musket. 
Open your pan. 
Clear your pan. 
Prime your pan. 
Shut your pan. 
Cast off your loose corns. 
Blow off your loose corns and bring about 

your musket to the left side. 
Trail your rest. 

Balance your musket in your left hand. 
Find out your charge. 
Open your charge. 
Charge with powder. 
Draw forth your scouring stick. 
Turn and shorten him to an inch. 
Charge with bullet. 

Put your scouring stick into your musket. 
Ram home your charge. 
Withdraw your scouring stick. 

He gives, also, funeral, saluting and other postures; and the 
postures of lighter muskets, which were used without rests, but 
were fired with a match. 

"The Postures of the Pike" are given; some of them are handle, 
raise, charge, order, advance, shoulder, port, comport, check, 
trail, and lay down, your pikes. The pikes in England were 16 
feet in length; in Connecticut, 14 feet. 

His musket signified a hand-gun with a matchlock. The cock 
was that part of the lock which held the burning match that was 
applied to the powder in the pan. Muskets were generally large 
and heavy, and required a forked staff or rest to support them 
when presented to a fire. The rests had a crotch or crescent at 
the top, and a sharp iron at the bottom to fasten them in the 
ground. The musketeer had a rest in his hand, or hung to it by 
a string, in nearly all his exercises. 

Bandoleers. — Musketeers carried their powder in little wooden, 
tin, or copper, cylindrical boxes, each containing one charge; 
twelve of these boxes were fixed to a belt two inches wide worn 

Turn and shorten him to a handful. 

Return your scouring stick. 

Bring forward your musket and rest. 

Poise your musket and recover your rest. 

Join your rest to the outside of your musket. 

Draw forth your match. 

Blow your coal. 

Cock your match. 

Fit your match. 

Guard your pan. 

Blow the ashes from your coal. 

Open your pan. 

Present upon your rest. 

Give fire breast-high. 

Dismount your musket, joining the rest to 
the outside of your musket. 

Uncock and return your match. 

Clear your pan. 

Shut your pan. 

Poise your musket. 

Rest your musket. 

Take your musket off the rest and set the 
butt end to the ground. 

Lay down your musket. 

Lay down your match. 

Take your rest into your right hand, clear- 
ing the string from your left wrist. 

Lay down your rest. 

Take off your bandoleers. 

Lay down your bandoleers. 

Here endeth the postures of the musket. 


over the left shoulder, and the boxes and belt were called bando- 
leers. Usually the primer containing the priming powder, the 
bullet-bag and priming-wire were fastened to the leather belt. 
These and the little long boxes hung upon the belt, and made 
much rattling. This belt with its dangling appendages, had 
some resemblance to a string of sleigh-bells. The match-cord 
was tied to the bandoleer-belt. 

A Foot Company Paraded. 

The following representation is from Elton, but his company was larger, m. signifies 
a musketeer, p. a pikeman, and D. a drummer. The sergeants stood at the corners. 




4th Sergeant. 








p. p. p. p. p. p. 














p. p. p. p. p. p. 













p. p. p. p. p. p. 













p. p. p. p. p. p. 









zd Sergeant. 


In the Directions for training a Company of Horsemen, in the Supplement to Elton, are 

the following seventeen commands. The book details the motions made in performing 
each command. 

1. Horse, i. e., mount your horse. 10. Lade your pistol. 

2. Uncap your pistol case. 11. Draw your rammer. 

3. Draw your pistol. 12. Lade with bullet and ram home. 

4. Order your pistol. 13. Return your rammer. 

5. Span your pistol. 14. Pull down the cock. 

6. Prime your pistol. 1 5. Recover your pistol. 

7. Shut your pan. 16. Present and give fire. 

8. Cast about your pistol. 17. Return your pistol. 

9. Gage your flasque. 

Twenty commands are given for handling the carbine with a snaphance or firelock, when 
used by horsemen. 

The militia laws of Massachusetts enacted previous to 1660, 
ordered that two thirds of each foot company should be musket- 
eers; and that each musketeer should have a musket, with a prim- 
ing-wire, worm, scourer, and mold for bullets, a sword, rest, 
bandoleers, one pound of powder, twenty bullets and two fathoms 
(twelve feet) of match. About one third of the company might 
be pikemen, and each was to have a pike, corslet, head-piece, 
sword and snapsack. In 1666, each pikeman might have either 
a corslet, buff coat or quilted coat. It required 64 men for a full 
company. Such a company had a captain, lieutenant, ensign, 
clerk, sergeants, corporals, and drummers. Sergeants carried a 
halbert. Towns were to keep powder, musket-bullets and match. 

A troop of horsemen was not to exceed 70 soldiers. Each 
trooper was to have a good horse, saddle, bridle, holsters, pistols 
or carbine, and sword. A troop had a captain, lieutenant, 
cornet, quarter-master, clerk, trumpeter, and corporals. Each 


trooper was obliged to keep a good horse at all times, and was 
allowed by the colony five shillings a year. 

All males above i6 years of age were to attend military exer- 
cises and service, except those exempt by law. The Court of 
Assistants and County Courts had power to discharge men for 
just cause; and in Hampshire, men who could not train by reason 
of age, weakness, or lameness, applied to the Court and were 
freed from training. 

Companies were to be exercised six days every year. There 
was to be a regimental training once in three years. John Dunton, 
who came to Boston to sell books in 1686, says it was the custom 
to have a prayer at the beginning and ending of a training. Where 
he trained, the captain made the prayers. 

In Hampshire, towns not having a full company of 64 men, 
had no captain; the soldiers were commanded by a lieutenant, 
ensign, or sergeant. It was not until 1657 that the Springfield 
company had three commissioned officers; John Pynchon was 
captain, Elizur Holyoke, lieutenant, Thomas Cooper, ensign. 
Northampton had a small train-band in 1658; and in 1661 the 
soldiers chose William Clark, lieutenant, and David Wilton, 
ensign. In 1663, they chose Aaron Cooke, senior, for captain, 
who had held the same office in Windsor. He removed to West- 
field and remained there about ten years, and when he returned, 
was again captain of the company. The first captain of Hadley 
was Aaron Cooke, junior, in 1678; of Westfield, John Maudsley 
in 1686; of Hatfield, John AUis, under Andros in 1687 or 1688; 
and Samuel Partrigg succeeded him in 1689. At Deerfield, 
Jonathan Wells was appointed captain in 1692-93, partly in ref- 
erence to the garrison. John Lyman was appointed ensign at 
Northfield in 1686. 

Hadley militia. — On the nth of May, 1661, the town "voted 
that there shall be a training on the i6th inst. Voted that the 
town will buy Mr. Pynchon's colors that he wrote to the town 
about; and desire brother Lewis to buy a good drum for the town." 
On the i6th of December, 1661, Richard Goodman and William 
AUis were chosen "to view all the arms in the town, and see if 
they are according to law." The train-band of Hadley chose 
Samuel Smith, lieutenant, John Russell, senior, clerk, and Richard 
Goodman, sergeant, and they were approved by the county 
court in March, 1663. The band also chose Aaron Cooke, Jr. 
ensign-bearer, and John Dickinson and Joseph Kellogg, sergeants, 
and they were approved by the court in September, 1663. In 
March, 1664, the town voted to pay Zechariah Field twenty 


shillings for the drum they had of him; and in April, they voted 
to buy a new drum. Samuel Smith was lieutenant, and Aaron 
Cooke, Jr. ensign, about fifteen years, including the trying time 
of Philip's war. In May, 1678, Lt. Smith requested to be freed 
from military trust, being, as he said, "near eighty years of age." 
He was discharged, and Aaron Cooke, Jr. was appointed captain, 
Philip Smith, lieutenant, and Joseph Kellogg, sr. ensign. Philip 
Smith was chosen lieutenant of the troop the same year. The 
officers of the Hadley company previous to 1700 were as follows : — 

Captains. Lieutenants. Ensigns. 

1663. Samuel Smith. 1663. Aaron Cooke, Jr. 

1678. Aaron Cooke, Jr. 1678. Piiilip Smith. 1678. Joseph Kellogg. 

1679. Joseph Kellogg. 1679- Timothy Nash. 

About 1692. Timothy Nash. About 1692. Chileab Smith. 

Aaron Cooke performed the duties of captain until 17 13, when he 
was 72 years of age. Accordingto the inscription on his grave-stone, 
he was a captain 35 years. His father, Aaron Cooke, of Northamp- 
ton, acted as captain until his death in 1690, at the age of 80. 

The Hampshire Troop or Company of Horsemen. — In March, 
1663, divers persons of the soldiery met at Northampton and 
"there listed themselves into a Troope," and chose officers, viz., 
Capt. John Pynchon of Springfield, for captain; Ens. David 
Wilton of Northampton, lieutenant; Lieut. William Allis of Hadley, 
l/cornet; and Henry Woodward of Northampton, and George Col- 
ton of Springfield, quarter-masters. These officers were approved 
by the county court. There were ten troopers from Hadley, viz., 
Mr. Henry Clark, William Lewis, Thomas Coleman, Nathaniel 
Dickinson, sr., Thomas Dickinson, Philip Smith, Andrew War- 
ner, Samuel Billing, John Coleman, William Allis. The last 
three lived on the west side of the river. In 1669, Springfield had 
21 troopers, Northampton, 18, Hadley, 14. In 1674, Springfield 
had 19, Northampton, 13, Hadley, 7, Hatfield, 6, Westfield, 5. 
The dress and equipments of the troopers were more costly 
and showy than those of the foot soldiers, and they may have 
deemed their service more honorable. The expensive "trooping 
scarf" of Capt. Pynchon was embellished with gold lace, and 
silver glittered on his sword and belt and on other parts of his 
arms and dress. The other officers wore silk scarfs or sashes. 
When this company met in one of our villages for exercise, it was 
a day of excitement for the young, who heard the shrill trumpet, 
and admired the proud banner, and prancing steeds, and the gay 
appearance and quick motions of the men. The officers of the 
Hampshire troop of cavalry, previous to 1700, as far as they can 
be found, were the following: — 


Captains. Cornets. 

1663. John Pynchon of Springfield. 1663. William Allis of Hadley, (Hatfield) 

1672. Joseph Whiting of Westfield. 
Lieutenants. 1678. Joseph Parsons of Northampton. 

1663. David Wilton of Northampton. 1685. Thomas Dewey of Westfield. 

1672. William Allis of Hatfield. Nehemiah Dickinson of Hadley. 

1678. Philip Smith of Hadley. Quarter-Masters. 

John Taylor of Northampton. ,, j Henry Woodward of Northampton. 

■^'\ George Colton of Springfield. 
1683. Samuel Partrigg of Hadley. 

Regimental Officers. — The regiments of Massachusetts had 
only one officer, denominated major, or sergeant-major. In May, 
1671, Capt. John Pynchon was appointed Sergeant-Major of the 
Hampshire regiment. He was the first regimental officer of the 
county. About 1687, Gov. Andros made him a colonel, and 
Capt. Aaron Cooke of Northampton, a major. After the fall of 
Andros, they retained only the offices they had before. Under 
the new charter, Massachusetts established the offices of colonel 
and lieut. colonel. Connecticut had no colonel and lieut. colonel 
until they were appointed by Gov. Andros about 1678. 

Indian guns. — The Indians, before and during Philip's war, 
did not use matchlock muskets, but lighter guns with flint locks 
or snaphances. They were not troubled with burning match 
and cumbrous rests. In these things they acted wisely. 

Change of Fire-arms in the 17th century. — The early legis- 
lators of Massachusetts, following the example of England, 
ordered the matchlock and rest, and the pike for foot soldiers. 
Yet flintlocks and guns without rests were among the people. 
The pistols and carbines of the troopers, and some fowling pieces 
and other guns, were fired with flints without rests. Some sol- 
diers in New Haven, Plymouth and other places had firelocks and 
flints, though matchlocks and match were much more common 
among soldiers. It is believed that firelocks, often called snap- 
hances, were gradually displacing matchlocks, before the Indian 
war began. John Pynchon sold flints after 1666, and he sold 
match also. In September, 1673, Massachusetts General Court 
desired Mr. Hezekiah Usher to purchase in England, "five 
hundred new snaphances or firelock muskets."* After Philip's 
war began, men soon perceived that matchlocks and pikes, how- 
ever efficient in European warfare, were of little avail against 
nimble, skulking Indians, who did not face their enemies in the 
open field, and flintlocks were used whenever they could be 
obtained. Many expeditions against the Indians were made on 

*292 were obtained, which cost here, in Boston money, 19 shillings each. 


horseback, by men who carried carbines or longer arms, and 
much scouting was done on horses, and these horsemen were not 
cumbered with match and rests. In November, 1675, Connect- 
icut ordered a "stock of flints" to be sent to New London for the 
expedition against the Narragansets. In November, 1675, Mass- 
achusetts ordered that every town should provide and keep six 
flints for every listed soldier in the town. In the preceding October, 
Massachusetts ordered that all troopers should furnish themselves 
with carbines, and all pikemen with fire-arms. Before 1676, a 
revolution was effected, and pikes and matchlocks were generally 
laid aside. Pistols were accounted useless against Indians. In 
February, 1676, the Massachusetts committee of war estimated 
that two thousand flints were necessary for an expedition of 500 
men — no match. 

A great change had practically taken place, yet the law for 
matchlocks and pikes continued unrepealed. A few matchlocks 
were used in 1676, but there is no allusion to pikes. Boston had 
some pikemen in 1686. New England generally discarded match- 
locks, rests and pikes many years before they were laid aside in 
old England. 

New Militia Law. — In the new law of Massachusetts, in 1693, 
matchlocks, match, rests and pikes were entirely disregarded. 
Foot soldiers were to have a firelock-musket with a barrel 3J feet 
in length at least or other good fire-arms; a snapsack, a collar with 
12 bandoleers or a cartouch box, one pound of powder, 20 bullets, 
12 flints, a sword or cutlass, a worm and priming wire. Towns 
were to keep flints. 

Troopers were to have a horse worth five pounds and not less 
than 14 hands high, with a saddle, bit, bridle, holsters, pectoral 
and crupper; a carbine with a barrel not less than 2^ feet in length, 
and a belt and swivel; a case of pistols, a sword or cutlass, a flask 
or cartouch box, a pound of powder, three pounds of bullets, 
twenty flints, boots and spurs. They had no allowance from the 

Males from 16 to 60 years of age were to train, except those 
usually exempted. Negroes and Indians were among the ex- 
empts. There were four training days in a year, and a regimental 
muster once in three years. When soldiers were levied, a man 
impressed must go, or pay five pounds. A few years after, he must 
pay 10 pounds, or be imprisoned 6 months. 

"The Complete Soldier," a book of 96 pages, giving instruction 
in military exercises, was printed in Boston in 1 701, and a second 
edition with additions, of 124 pages, appeared in 1706. It was 


collected from Elton, BarifF and others, by Nicholas Boone of 
Boston, It was undoubtedly the first military book published 
in the British colonies. It directs the soldiers to appear "with 
their hair or periwigs tied up in bags, and their hats briskly 
cocked." This must have been an English direction. 

Bayonets. — The French had daggers which they screwed into 
the muzzle of their guns, but as the guns could not be fired with 
such bayonets on, they contrived to fasten the daggers or bayonets 
on the outside of the muzzle by a socket. — The Massachusetts 
General Court voted about "bagonets," in 1700, and in 171 1 
they ordered the Boston regiment to have "goose-necked bayonets" 
with a socket, instead of swords or cutlasses. The order did not 
extend to the other regiments. Bayonets were of little use against 
Indians, and few were seen in Hampshire until the French wars 
which ended in 1748 and 1763. 

Cartridges, or paper cases with powder, were carried by some 
dragoons in a carduce box in Philip's war. Cartouch boxes as 
well as bandoleers, for foot soldiers, are in the law of 1693. The 
cartouch, cartridge or carduce box often appears in Hampshire 
after 1700, especially among the troopers. The powder horn 
continued to be used by many of the infantry. 

The Fife.— The "ear-piercing fife,"' noted by Shakespeare, 
was discontinued in the English army after his time, and was not 
restored until 1747, having been neglected more than a century 
in England and America. 

Colors or Flags. — Militia companies procured rich and expen- 
sive colors in the 17th century. In 1660, John Pynchon sold to 
Ens. Wilton of Northampton for the militia company, colors, staff, 
tassel and top for 5 pounds. The next year, he sold to Hadley, 
for the use of the soldiers, colors, staff, tassel and top for 5 pounds. 
These flags were long and of costly silk. In the state house at 
Hartford, a few years since, was a part of a flag, of substantial 
red silk, with the date, 1640, upon it. Those of Northampton 
and Hadley may have been red. Sumptuous flags seem to have 
continued down to the Revolution, Timothy Pickering, in 1775, 
censured the enormous waste of silk used for colors, and said 
"three or four square yards of silk are taken to make one color." 
When the wind blew, the ensign had much trouble, and had to 
gather the flag in folds in his hands, Pickering would reduce it 
to about a yard in length. — The pine tree was a favorite symbol 
with Massachusetts; and Felt says the battle of Bunker Hill was 
fought under colors having a pine tree on them; and the state flag 
for vessels in 1776, was white with a green pine tree. 


The flag was an ensign, and the bearer was an ensign-bearer, 
usually called ensign, and sometimes ancient. In Shakspeare, 
Pistol was FalstafF's ancient. In the early records of Connecti- 
cut, Ensign Stoughton of Windsor, was called Ancient Stoughton. 

Calling the Roll. — The manner of doing this has not changed 
much in 250 years. Justice Shallow called some of Falstaff's 
soldiers — Thomas Wart! Here, sir. Francis Feeble! Here, 
sir. In Beaumont and Fletcher, a sergeant called the roll — Wil- 
liam Hammerton, pewterer! Here. George Greengoose, poul- 
terer! Here. In Shakspeare, when Peter Quince called the 
names of the players, the answer was — Here, Peter Quince. 

Watches. — The early laws ordered watches in time of peace, in 
every town, from the first of May to the end of September. They 
were usually under the care of the constables. There was some 
distrust of the Indians. The watchmen began to examine night- 
walkers after ten o'clock. — Military watches were required in the 
several towns in time of war, and when danger was apprehended, 
under the charge of the military officers. Every town was ordered 
to provide a watch-house, and candles and wood. Sometimes 
warding, or day watching was required. Watches were kept up 
in these river towns much of the time for a century. The people 
in those days bore without murmuring, these and other burdens, 
which their descendants would deem intolerable. 

Alarms in the night were made by firing three guns, followed 
by the beating of drums, and there were other ways of alarming 
the people. A hundred years later, in the Revolutionary war, 
the inhabitants of these towns were several times aroused from 
sleep, by the firing of three guns. The beating of drums suc- 

Prices of military articles in Pynchon's account books, 1652 to 1680. — New drums, 35 
to 40 shillings, drum heads, 3s., bandoleers, 3s. to 3s. 9d., snapsacks, 2s., belts, many kinds, 
IS. 2d. to 9s., pike heads, 3s., worm, 6d., scourer, 6d.; match, much at 2d. a fathom, some 
4d. and 6d. a fathom; a horn powder flask, 5s., a powder horn, 8d.; guns, various prices, 
generally between 20 and 30s., a few above 30s., a fowling piece, 25s., gunlocks, 6s. 8d. to 
8s. 4d.; common sword or cutlass, 12s. to 15s., better ones, 20s. Flint is always in the 
singular in these accounts, as flint, 6d., 8d., &c. 

The equipment of troopers in Hampshire was expensive. A pair of pistols and holsters 
cost 37 shillings, saddle and furniture, 37s., boots, 20s., carbine, 25 to 30s., sword, cutlass 
or rapier, 20s. Some had a silk scarf, and a trooping coat. John Pynchon's "trooping 
scarf with gold lace" was valued at 70 shillings after his decease. 

In Hampshire, only a small part of the soldiers were pikemen at any time, and none 
carried pikes after the Indian war. In other parts of New England, the proportion of pike- 
men seems to have been much less than in England. The early laws did not require that 
one-third of the soldiers should be pikemen. 

The captains and lieutenants of foot companies had a sword, a half pike or leading staff, 



Witchcraft in Europe— In New England — In Hampshire county — Mary and Hugh Par- 
sons of Springfield — Mary Parsons of Northampton — Death of John Stebbins of North- 
ampton — Case of Mary Webster of Hadley — the witch mania of 1692 — Various notices 
relating to Witchcraft. 

It was formerly the belief of all Christendom, that some persons 
called witches, were possessed of supernatural power, by an 
agreement with the devil, whereby they could procure advan- 
tages to themselves, and inflict evils on their enemies; and witch- 
craft was a capital crime by the laws of the diff"erent nations of 
Europe. The famous bull of pope Innocent VIII., in 1484, 
denouncing witchcraft, gave fury to the delusion. It is estimated 
that in about two hundred years, upwards of a hundred thousand 
were put to death for witchcraft in Europe;* and some calculate 
that not less than a hundred thousand suff'ered in Germany alone. f 
At the time of the Reformation, Protestants were not only burnt 
as heretics, but many were put to death under the pretence that 
they were sorcerers. 

The witch mania raged extensively in both Catholic and Protes- 
tant countries. The reformers were as firm believers in witch- 
craft as the catholics. The madness prevailed in Italy, France, 
Germany, Switzerland, &c. before it manifested itself in Great 
Britain. From the date of the statute of queen Elizabeth against 
witchcraft in 1562, the persecution of witches commenced in 
England, but did not reach its height until the 17th century. 
Bishop Jewell, in his sermons before the queen, used to conclude 
them by a fervent prayer, that she might be preserved from witches. 
He informed her that witches and sorcerers had marvelously in- 
creased within a few years. In 1593, the income of forty pounds, 
derived from the confiscated property of three persons executed 
for witchcraft, was appropriated for an annual lecture upon the 
enormity of witchcraft, to be preached by a doctor or bachelor of 
divinity, of Queen's college, Cambridge; and this annual sermon 
was continued 125 years or more. King James I. was a constant 
enemy of witches, and a chief encourager of those who perse- 
cuted them, first in Scotland and next in England. He wrote a 
famous treatise on demons and witches, and after the act of par- 
liament against witchcraft in 1603, persecution burst forth furi- 
ously in England, and in eighty years the number of those put to 
death, has been estimated at about thirty thousand ;4; and some 
thousands in Scotland. 

♦Blackwood's Magazine. j-Encyclopaedia Americana, ijilbid. — These estimates are 
as I find them, but they seem to me too high. 


In Europe, kings and nobles, popes and bishops, judges and 
lawyers, learned ministers of various denominations and other 
men of erudition, were fully persuaded of the existence of modern 
witches, who had entered into a compact with Satan. — Among 
those accused of witchcraft were many unprincipled persons, who 
had endeavored to^effect their wicked ends by the devil's aid, and 
if they were not witches, it was not for want of the will. These 
included some noble ladies and others in high life. Some under- 
took to teach the magic arts, and not a few thus instructed, really 
believed they had made a covenant with the devil. Others 
feigned witchcraft, and boasted of their power, in order to extort 
favors from the superstitious. Yet a great majority of the suffer- 
ers were innocent. 

* The first planters of New England believed that their Bibles 
affirmed the existence of witches, and it may be easily conceived 
that they were firm believers in the reality of witchcraft, in an age 
when this belief was nearly universal in Europe. 

Witches in Connecticut. — Winthrop's History, under 1647, says 
one of Windsor was executed at Hartford for a witch. The 
records of Connecticut do not allude to any trial or execution of 
a witch in 1647. On the 7th of December, 1648, Mary Johnson, 
at Hartford, was found guilty of familiarity with the devil by her 
own confession, and was executed. One or two persons were 
tried for witchcraft in Hartford in 1 651; it is not known whether 
any one was executed. In 1651, Goody Bassett of Stratford was 
executed for witchcraft, probably at Fairfield. In 1653 or the 
early part of 1654, Goodwife Knap was hung at Fairfield for a 
witch. In January or February, 1663, a woman named Green- 
smith, apparently wife of Nathaniel Greensmith, was hung at 
Hartford for witchcraft. In March, 1665, Elizabeth Seger was 
found guilty of witchcraft by a jury at Hartford, but the court 
set her free. In October, 1669, Katharine Harrison of Wethers- 
field was found guilty of witchcraft by a jury at Hartford, 
but the court did not approve the verdict, and afterwards dis- 
missed her. In September, 1692, Mercy Disborough, wife of 
Thomas Disborough of Compo in Fairfield, and two or three 
other women, were tried at Fairfield for witchcraft, and all were 
acquitted except Mercy Disborough, who was found guilty and 
sentenced to death. She appears not to have been executed. 

King James I. averred that witches thrown into the water 
would float and not sink, and he thought this was a "good help" 
to detect them. The experiment was tried at Fairfield, and 
Mercy Disborough and Elizabeth Clawson were bound, hands 


and feet, and put into the water, and witnesses testified that they 
"swam Hke a cork." Yet E. Clawson was acquitted, and M. 
Disborough was not condemned because she floated. 

In Massachusetts, Margaret Jones of Charlestown, was hung 
for witchcraft at Boston, June 15, 1648 — the first execution for 
this offense in this colony. Widow Anne Hibbins of Boston, 
was executed as a witch in 1656, and two or three others are report- 
ed to have suffered in Massachusetts previous to 1692, and in the 
year 1692, twenty were executed at Salem. — In the colonies of 
New Haven and Plymouth, no one was condemned for witch- 
craft, before or after their union with other colonies. 

Witchcraft in Hampshire County. 

The first case of supposed witchcraft in Hampshire county, 
occurred at Springfield, in 1651. Mary Parsons, wife of Hugh 
Parsons of that town, was sent to Boston and imprisoned on sus- 
picion of witchcraft, and for murdering her child. She was tried 
for both offenses by the General Court, May 13, 1651. The 
charge in the first indictment was, that being seduced by the devil, 
about the end of February last, at Springfield, she consulted with 
a familiar spirit, making a covenant with him, and had used divers 
devilish practices by witchcraft, to the hurt ofthe persons of Martha 
and Rebecca Moxon, against the word of God, and the laws of 
this jurisdiction. Her plea was, not guilty; and the court found 
the evidences insufficient and cleared her. The two Moxons 
were children of Rev. George Moxon of Springfield. 

Mary Parsons had a son named Joshua, born Oct. 26, 1650, 
whom she killed March 4, 165 1, according to the Springfield 
record. She was charged in the indictment at Boston, May 13, 

1 65 1, with willfully and most wickedly murdering her own 
child, to which she pleaded guilty, and was condemend to die by 
the General Court. She was reprieved until the 29th of May. 
She was a deranged woman, and one like her would not have 
been found guilty of murder, 50 years later. 

Hugh Parsons of Springfield, was tried at a Court of Assistants 
at Boston, May 12, 1652, a year after the trial of his wife. He 
was accused of having familiar and wicked converse with the 
devil, and of using divers devilish practices or witchcrafts, in 
March last, and at other times, to the hurt of divers persons. 
The jury found him guilty, but the magistrates not consenting 
to the verdict, the case came before the General Court, May 27, 

1652, who judged that he was not guilty of witchcraft. After this, 
he removed from Springfield. 


Mary Bartlett, wife of Samuel Baitlett of Northampton, died 
in July, 1674, and her husband, her father, James Bridgman, 
and others, were suspicious that she came to her end by unnatu- 
ral and unlawful means; and that Mary Parsons, wife of Joseph 
Parsons, senior, of Northampton, had caused her death by witch- 
craft. Mary Parsons was a respectable woman, and her husband 
was one of the most wealthy men in Northampton. She may 
have been somewhat proud and high-spirited, and thereby have 
excited some ill-will. 

The county court met at Springfield, Sept. 29, 1674; and though 
the trial of persons accused of capital offenses did not belong to 
this court, they sometimes inquired into such cases. Samuel 
Bartlett procured divers testimonies on oath from Northampton, 
and Mary Parsons, knowing what was doing, and that she was 
implicated, did not wait for a summons, but "voluntarily made 
her appearance in court, desiring to clear herself of such an exe- 
crable crime." The matter was referred to an adjourned court at 
Northampton, which met January 5, 1675, and Samuel Bartlett 
produced his witnesses. "Goodwife Parsons being called to 
speak for herself,* she did assert her own innocency, often men- 
tioning how clear she was of such a crime, and that the righteous 
God knew her innocency, with whom she had left her cause." 
The court "appointed a jury of soberdized, chaste women to 
make diligent search upon the body of Mary Parsons, whether 
any marks of witchcraft might appear, who gave in their account 
to the court on oath, of what they found." The court ordered 
all the testimony, including the report of the women, to be sent 
to the Governor and Magistrates at Boston, leaving further pro- 
ceedings with them. Mary Parsons was ordered to appear before 
the Court of Assistants at Boston, if so required by them, and her 
husband, Joseph Parsons, was bound in a bond of 50 pounds, 
for her appearance. 

Mary Parsons appeared before the Court of Assistants, March 
2, 1675, and the grand jury presented an indictment against her. 
She was imprisoned in Boston until May 13, when she was tried. 
She was accused of entering into familiarity with the devil, and 
committing several acts of witchcraft on the person or persons of 

*Mary Parsons, as well as her mother, widow Margaret Bliss of Springfield, had sufR- 
cient ability and confidence to speak before a court. There were other women, who some- 
times managed their own business at courts, and spoke when necessary. This was not 
deemed improper. Mary Parsons was invited ''to speak for herself." In 1667, a woman 
spoke in a town meeting in Windsor, in a case which concerned her, and not without effect. 
In 1677, widow Editha Holyoke of Springfield, went into court and "spoke in the case," 
relating to her share of her husband's estate. 


one or more. She pleaded not guilty, and the jury brought in 
their verdict that she was not guilty, and she was discharged. 

Some testimony was presented to the county court against John 
Parsons, son of Joseph and Mary Parsons, but the court did not 
find much weight in it, and dismissed him. 

On the 7th of March, 1679, John Stebbins of Northampton, 
died in an unusual manner, and a jury of inquest, composed of 
eleven Northampton men and Doct. Thomas Hastings of Hatfield, 
examined the body. They found "several hundred spots, small 
ones as if they had been shot with small shot, which were scraped 
and under them were holes into his body," and some other things 
not usual. There were suspicions of witchcraft. The county 
court met at Northampton, April 29, 1679, and Samuel Bartlett, 
brother of Stebbins's widow, was allowed to bring in such testi- 
mony as he could find. The court sent the testimonies to the 
Governor and Magistrates, but no one was prosecuted.* 

Mary Webster of Hadley. 

The most notable witch in Hampshire county was Mary Web- 
ster, the wife of William Webster of Hadley. Her maiden name 
was Mary Reeve, and they were married in 1670, when he was 
53 years old, and she probably some years younger. They be- 
came poor, and lived many years in a small house in the middle 
highway into the meadow,f and were sometimes aided by the 
town. Mary Webster's temper, which was not the most placid, 
was not improved by poverty and neglect, and she used harsh 
words when offended. Despised and sometimes ill-treated, t she 
was soured with the world, and rendered spiteful towards some 
of her neighbors. When they began to call her a witch, and to 
abuse her, she perhaps thought with the "Witch of Edmonton," 
in the old play, who said, " 'Tis all one, to be a witch, as to be 
accounted one." Many stories of the sorceries by which she dis- 

*There is a tradition that John Stebbins had been at work in a saw-mill some days before 
his death, and that some of the boards and logs, by the aid of witches, made strange move- 
ments, whereby he was injured. 

•j-This highway was then six rods wide, and on the north side towards the east end, were 
the pound, the house of William Webster, and for a time, that of Thomas Webster. About 
three rods wide from the north side were sold in 1797, and added to the adjoining homelot, 
which is now owned by John S. Bell, and the pound and William Webster's house are sup- 
posed to have been on the land now occupied for a garden and barn yard by Mr. Bell. 

jAt the September Court, 1680, Ann Belding, a girl in her i6th year, daughter of Sam- 
uel Belding of Hatfield, was charged with ^'purposes and practices against the body and 
life of Mary, wife of William Webster of Hadley." She acknowledged, and was fined one 
pound to Wm. Webster, and four pounds to the county. Her father engaged to pay. This 
is a strange affair, and cannot be explained. 


turbed the people of Hadley have been lost, but a few traditions 
have been preserved: — 

Teams passing to and from the meadow went by her door, and 
she so bewitched some cattle and horses that they stopped, and 
ran back, and could not be driven by her house. In such cases 
the teamsters used to go into the house and whip or threaten to 
whip her, and she would then let the team pass. She once turned 
over a load of hay near her house, and the driver went in and was 
about to chastise her, when she turned the load back again. She 
entered a house, and had such influence upon an infant on the 
bed or in the cradle, that it was raised to the chamber floor and 
fell back again, three times, and no visible hand touched it. 
There is a story that at another house, a hen came down chimney 
and got scalded in a pot, and it was soon found that Mary Webster 
was suffering from a scald. The story of her bewitching Philip 
Smith is retained, but is less prominent than the others.* 

Mary Webster appeared before the county court at North- 
ampton, March 27, 1683. The court was composed of John 
Pynchon of Springfield, Peter Tilton and Philip Smith of Hadley, 
William Clarke and Aaron Cooke of Northampton. Samuel 
Partrigg of Hadley was clerk. The following is from the record. 

Mary, wife of William Webster of Hadley, being under strong suspicion of having famil- 
iarity with the devil, or using witchcraft, and having been in examination before the worship- 
ful Mr. Tilton, and many testimonies brought in against her, or that did seem to centre upon 
her, relating to such a thing; and the worshipful Mr. Tilton aforesaid binding her to appear 
at this court, and having examined her yet further, and the testimonies aforenamed, look 
upon her case, a matter belonging to the Court of Assistants to judge of, and therefore have 
ordered said Mary Webster to be, by the first convenient opportunity, sent to Boston gaol 
and committed there as a prisoner, to be further examined there as aforesaid, and the clerk 
is to gather up all the evidences and fit them to be sent down by the worshipful Mr. Tilton, 
to our honored governor, that he may communicate them to the magistrates, as he shall 
judge meet, or further order prosecution of said matters. 

She was sent down to Boston in April, 1683, and the Court of 
Assistants was held at Boston, May 22d; Gov. Bradstreet, Deputy 
Gov. Danforth and nine Assistants being present. The record 
of the court follows: — 

Mary Webster, wife of William Webster of Hadley, being sent down upon suspicion of 
witchcraft and committed to prison, in order to her trial, was brought to the bar. The 
grand-jury being impannelled, they, on perusal of the evidences, returned that they did 
indict Mary Webster, wife to William Webster of Hadley, for that she, not having the fear 

*These stories and others were told with gravity by old persons, seventy years ago, and 
were believed by some and laughed at by others. There were certain persons who were 
noted as tellers of witch stories in Hadley, as in other towns. Widow Rebekah (Crow) 
Noble was a famous story teller. 


of God before her eyes, and being instigated by the devil, hath entered into covenant and had 
familiarity with him in the shape of a warraneage,* and had his imps sucking her, and teats 
or marks found on her, as in and by several testimonies may appear, contrary to the peace 
of our sovereign lord, the king, his crown and dignity, the laws of God and of this juris- 
diction — The court on their serious consideration of the testimonies, did leave her to further 

At the Assistant's Court, Sept. 4, 1683, Mary Webster, wife to William Webster of Had- 
ley, having been presented for suspicion of witchcraft, &c. by a grand-jury in Boston on 
the 22d of May last, and left to further trial, was now called and brought to the bar, and 
was indicted by the name of Mary Webster, &c. [Here the indictment of May 22d is all 
repeated; the warraneage comes in as before.] To which indictment she pleaded not guilty, 
making no exception against any of the jury, leaving herself to be tried by God and the 
country. The indictment and evidences in the case were read and committed to the jury, 
and the jury brought in their verdict that they found her^not guilty. 

The expenses of the colony about Mary Webster, appear in the accounts of the colony 
treasurer, viz., 

£. s. d. 
Bringing down Mary Webster from Hadley to prison, .... 500 

Witnesses about Good wife Webster, . . . . . . . 12152 

Robert Earl for keeping Mary Webster in Boston, . . . . 400 

Cash for carrying Mary Webster to Hadley, . . . . . 200 

'3 15 

This acquittal must have elated Mary Webster, and disappointed 
many of the people of Hadley, whose numerous written testi- 
monies, drawn up with care, had failed to convince a Boston jury, 
that she was a witch. Sometime after this trial, the power of 
this enchantress was supposed to be exerted upon Lieut. Philip 
Smith, who died on the loth of January, 1685. The following 
details are from Cotton Mather's Magnalia: — 

Mr. Philip Smith, aged about fifty years, a son of eminently virtuous parents, a deacon 
of a church in Hadley, a member of the General Court, a justice in the county Court, a 
select man for the affairs df the town, a lieutenant of the troop, and which crowns all, a man 
for devotion, sanctity, gravity, and all that was honest, exceeding exemplary. Such a man 
was in the winter of the year 1684, murdered with an hideous witchcraft, that filled all 
those parts of New England, with astonishment. He was, by his office concerned about 
relieving the indigences of a wretched woman in the town; who being dissatisfied at some 
of his just cares about her, expressed herself unto him in such a manner, that he declared 
himself thenceforward apprehensive of receiving mischief at her hands. 

About the beginning of January, 1684-5, he began to be very valetudinarious. He 
shewed such weanedness from and weariness of the world, that he knew not (he said) 
whether he might pray for his continuance here: and such assurance he had of the Divine 
love unto him, that in raptures he would cry out. Lord, stay thy hand; it is enough, it is 
more than thy frail servant can bear. But in the midst of these things he still uttered an 
hard suspicion that the ill woman who had threatened him, had made impressions with 
inchantments upon him. While he remained yet of a sound mind, he solemnly charged his 
brother to look well after him. Be sure, (said he) to have a care of me; for you shall see 

*Warraneag, in some Indian dialects, was the same as the Nipmuck wallaneag or wool- 
laneag. It was the name of the fisher, or pecan, or wild black cat of the woods. All the 
testimony on which the indictment was founded, came from persons in Hadley. She had 
undoubtedly been searched for witch marks by some of the women of Hadley. 


strange things. There shall be a wonder in Hadley! I shall not he dead when it is thought 
I am! He pressed this charge over and over. 

In his distresses he exclaimed much upon the woman aforesaid, and others, as being 
seen by him in the room. Some of the young men in the town being out of their wits at the 
strange calamities thus upon one of their most beloved neighbors, went three or four times 
to give disturbance unto the woman thus complained of: and all the while they were dis- 
turbing of her, he was at ease, and slept as a weary man: yea, these were the only times 
that they perceived him to take any sleep in all his illness. Gaily pots of medicines provided 
for the sick man, were unaccountably emptied: audible scratchings were made about the 
bed, when his hands and feet lay wholly still, and were held by others. They beheld fire 
sometimes on the bed; and when the beholders began to discourse of it, it vanished away. 
Divers people actually felt something often stir in the bed, at a considerable distance from 
the man: it seemed as big as a cat, but they could never grasp it. Several trying to lean on 
the bed's head, tho' the sick man lay wholly still, the bed would shake so as to knock their 
heads uncomfortably. Mr. Smith dies: the jury that viewed his corpse, found a swelling 
on one breast, his back full of bruises, and several holes that seemed made with awls. After 
the opinion of all had pronounced him dead, his countenance continued as lively as if he 
had been alive; his eyes closed as in a slumber, and his nether jaw not falling down. 

Thus he remained from Saturday morning about sunrise, till Sabbath-day in the after- 
noon; when those who took him out of the bed, found him still warm, tho' the season was 
as cold as had almost been known in any age: and a New England winter does not want 
for cold. But on Monday morning they found the face extremely tumified and discolored. 
It was black and blue, and fresh blood seemed running down his cheek upon the hairs. 
Divers noises were also heard in the room where the corpse lay; as the clattering of chairs 
and stools, whereof no account could be given. 

This was the end of so good a man. 

The "disturbing" of Mary Webster by the Hadley young men, is thus related by Hutch- 
inson: — "While he [Philip Smith] lay ill, a number of brisk lads tried an experiment upon 
the old woman. Having dragged her out of the house, tlicy l-.ung her up until she was near 
dead, let her down, rolled her sometime in the snow, and at last buried her in it, and there 
left her; but it happened that she survived, and the m.elancholy man died." 

The people having failed in a legal prosecution, the young men 
now undertook to punish her illegally. Yet Mary Webster lived 
eleven years after they hung her up, and buried her in the snow, 
and died in peace in 1696.* Her age may have been about 
seventy. Her husband died in 1687 or 1688. 

Mary Webster was the fourth person sent from Connecticut 
River to Boston to be tried for witchcraft, and all were acquitted, 
— an indication that the courts were inclined to mildness. No 
inhabitant of Hampshire was ever executed for witchcraft. 

At the Springfield Court, Sept. 29, 1691, Mary Randall was 
complained of for witchcraft. The court postponed the case for 
a year, and then her father, William Randall of Enfield, became 
surety for her good behavior, and there were no further proceed- 
ings. This was the last recorded case of suspected witchcraft 
in Hampshire county. 

*It is not known that Mary Webster annoyed the people of Hadley by her witch pranks 
after 1685. Her last eleven years may have been spent in quietness. The inventory of her 
small estate after her decease, in 1696, included a bed and a few other things for housekeep- 
ing, and some articles of dress. She had a Bible, psalm-book and three sermon books, 
which were probably left by her husband. 


Previous to 1692, the number of persons executed for witch- 
craft in Massachusetts and Connecticut was nine or ten, though 
the magistrates intended to be cautious, and several times set 
aside the verdict of a jury to save those declared guilty. In Feb- 
ruary, 1692, a terrible witchcraft delusion, which commenced in 
Salem Village, now Danvers, produced great terror and suffer- 
ing in several towns and resulted in the execution of twenty per- 
sons. A few misguided ministers and magistrates, by their rash 
and unjustifiable proceedings, "led their fellow-citizens into a 
labyrinth of error and iniquity, and stained the character of their 
country."* In less than a year, men came to their senses, the 
destructive frenzy terminated, and the people looked back upon 
the scene of barbarity and cruelty with horror and remorse. 
Prosecutions for witchcraft forever ceased in New England. f 

The dreadful witch-mania of 1692, was local and not general. 
It did not extend into Hampshire county, and Connecticut was 
free from it, except a part of Fairfield county. Connecticut 
ceased to punish for witchcraft about the same time with Massa- 
chusetts. In 1693 and after, grand-juries refused to indict for 

Witchcraft was a capital crime in other colonies and the belief 
in it was as firm in them, as in Massachusetts and Connecticut. 
Suspected witches were tried in most, if not all, the other colonies, 
but it is not known that any were executed. Some of the colo- 
nies manifested their full conviction of the reality of witchcraft 
in the i8th century. South Carolina adopted the act of James I. 
"against conjuration, witchcraft and dealing with evil and wicked 
spirits," in 1712. Still later, in 1728, Rhode Island enacted that 
"witchcraft is and shall be felony; and whosoever shall be law- 
fully convicted thereof shall suflPer the pains of death." 

Almost all the absurdities, superstitions and cruelties connected 
with the belief in witchcraft in America, originated in Europe. 
Our courts, in witchcraft trials, had as guides the decisions of 
distinguished English judges, and the rules of eminent English 
lawyers. The people read English books on witchcraft, written 
by Puritans and by men of the English church. The Rev. 
Joseph Glanvill, vicar of Frome, chaplain of Charles II., and a 
member of the Royal Society, was a distinguished writer in favor 
of the existence of witches, witchcraft and apparitions, and his 

♦President Dwight. -j-A tradition is related by Pres. Dwight, that Col. Samuel Part- 
ridge of Hatfield, instead of listening to the complaint of a Northampton man, who accused 
his neighbor of bewitching him, ordered the accuser to be whipped ten stripes on the spot. 


books were read in New England before any such were published 

"The horse-shoe's nailed, each threshold's guard," said the 
poet Gay, 150 years since. Among the ridiculous preservatives 
against witchcraft was the horse-shoe nailed on the threshold of 
the door. Several writers in the 17th century mention that it 
was very common to nail horse-shoes to the threshold of doors in 
the west end of London, to keep out witches, and some were laid 
upon a tile under the porches of churches, to prevent witches enter- 
ing. Fifty years ago, many houses in England had the horse- 
shoe nailed against the threshold, and some may still be found. 
Howitt mentions a man at Nottingham, who has the ancient 
charm of reversed horse-shoes nailed on both the lintel and sill 
of his door.* 


The Poor of Hadley — Story of Rebekah Crow — Marriages and Weddings — Funerals and 
Mourning — Hadley Grave-yard — Titles — Names — Old Style and New Style. 

Among those who signed the agreement in 1659, to remove to 
Hadley, were John Arnold and widow Westly. Both were poor 
and infirm, and remained at Hartford. The record says that 
John Arnold was too weak to come to Hadley. Those who lived 
at Hadley voted in April, 1662, to give John Arnold £^ a year, 
at Hartford, during his life, and to his wife 50 shillings a year 
after his decease. Voted also to give widow Westly 50 shillings 
a year, if she remain at Hartford. 

For a long time, Hadley had no resident poor that required 
aid from the town. In May, 1676, when men were preparing to 

*A few in New England had faith in the efficacy of the horse-shoe. The houses of two 
or three men (brothers) in Northampton, had a horse-shoe fastened to the threshold, about 
a hundred years since. 

European writers affirm that a belief in witchcraft lingers extensively in every country 
of Europe. There is much of it in England. Let no one imagine that it is extinct in the 
United States. 

Hutchinson says more persons have been put to death for witchcraft in a single county 
in England, in a short space of time, than have suffered in all New England, since the first 

The feats attributed to witches were not all imaginary. Those who testified were not 
all impostors. Some strange, inexplicable deeds were done, as in modern spiritualism. 
This may be admitted, without believing that there is any thing supernatural in these things. 


go up to the falls-fight, the town voted to pay for damage in per- 
son and estate, if the colony failed to pay. Jonathan Wells was 
severely wounded, and was a long time under the care of Mr. 
Bulkley, the surgeon, at Wethersfield. Massachusetts did not 
pay all the expense, and Hadley paid some pounds. 

In 1679, the town erected a small house, called the town house, 
for the present use of Thomas Webster, in the middle highway 
not far from the pound. William Webster previously had a 
small house in the same highway. See page 189. Thomas 
Webster was not supported by the town. He maintained his 
family by his labor, and returned to Northfield in 1684. William 
Webster was aided by the town some years in his old age; and his 
widow, who had been reputed a witch, was furnished with diet 
and wood a few years. 

Thomas Elgarr, who had been a soldier in the Indian war, 
resided in Hadley some years, and owing to disease or lameness, 
he was supported by the town a year or two. The town paid 32 
persons £1^ for keeping him 65 weeks at 4s. per week previous to 
January, 1685. He seems to have gone from house to house, 
and was kept from one to three weeks at a place. Each was 
paid 4s. per week in town pay. He recovered and settled in 

In 1687, widow Baldwin was poor and infirm, and the town 
voted March 3d, that she should be removed from house to house, 
to such as are able to receive her, and remain a fortnight in each 
family. "To go from Samuel Porter's, senior, southward, and 
round the town." Joseph Baldwin, senior and junior, each left 
a widow, and it was one of these widows that was to board "round 
the town" of Hadley. Both removed to Springfield, where they 
had relatives. 

John Hillier (or Hilliard,) was from Windsor, and after living 
many years in Northampton, removed to Hadley, where he died 
in 1729, aged 85. Had a wife and three children. In 1697, he 
was to have the house near the pound that William Webster had 
occupied. In 1718, the town voted to build a small log house for 
him, "where he now lives." He had occasional aid from the 
town in his old age.— In 1728, the town voted ;^io to support the 

In 1 73 1, and four years after, the town voted 40 pounds yearly 
to Mr. Chauncey, in consideration of two indigent persons in his 
family. In 1735, his son is mentioned as one of them, meaning 
Israel, who was deranged some years. The other indigent 


person is unknown. In 1760, Daniel Smith, a deranged man, 
died in Amherst. He had received aid from Hadley. 

These are all the poor aided by the town, that are found in the 
Hadley records for a century. Perhaps the names of some are 
not in the records. It may be doubted whether the expense of 
the town for the poor exceeded 150 pounds in 100 years, exclusive 
of those at Mr. Chauncey's. From 1760 to 1780, Aaron Wells is 
the only pauper that appears in the records, but there may have 
been others. 

Previous to 1793, the number of paupers had increased to eight, 
viz., Joel Kellogg and wife, Jabez Selden and wife, David Warner, 
widow Rebekah Noble,* Rebekah Smith, widow Coats. — The 
fathers of five or six of these left good estates. 

In January, 1793, Major John Smith "bid off" these 8 persons, 
and agreed to board and clothe them for a year for 88 pounds, or 
II pounds each, (about t^'] dollars,) and "to return them at the 
year's end as well clothed as when he takes them." In January, 
1794, the same eight poor persons, by vote of the town, were "to 
be disposed of to the lowest bidder, singly, or in pairs. "f Most 
of them were bid off at 4 shillings per week. From 1795 to 1805, 
the town voted yearly for the support of paupers, from 200 to 
250 dollars. Since 1805, the expense of the poor has in some 
years been as high as 500, 600 or 700 dollars. 

Marriages and Weddings. 

In Massachusetts, no persons were married by ministers for 62 
years, except a very few in Boston and the vicinity, under the gov- 
ernment of Dudley and Andros. Only magistrates, and such as 
the General Court and Court of Assistants should authorize, 
where there was no magistrate, were allowed to join persons to- 
gether in marriage. There were similar laws in the colonies of 

*Rebekah Crow, born in 1712, was a daughter of Samuel Crow of Hadley, and had re- 
spectable relatives in Hadley and Hatfield. When young, she was a girl of superior beauty 
and much admired. She was wooed by a young man from Hartford, and the attachment 
. was mutual. She was spirited and self-directing, and in attending an evening party in 
Hadley, her lover paid more attention to another lady than she thought was proper, and her 
jealousy was excited and she hastily dismissed him. She soon exceedingly regretted what 
she had done, but did not attempt to conciliate him. According to tradition, she was after 
this, in some respects, a changed person, and did not again become a gay and sprightly girl. 
She married at the age of 49, Daniel Noble of Westfield and after his death, lived in Hadley, 
and when her estate was expended, she was maintained by the town. She who in early life 
had as fair prospects as any young lady in Hadley, died a town pauper in 1802, at the age 
of 90. She possessed a great fund of anecdotes and stories, including many witch-stories, 
and she delighted the young by her wonderful recitals. 

j-This censurable practice of disposing of the poor to the lowest bidder has long been 
discontinued in Hadley. 


Connecticut, New Haven and Plymouth. The ministers of New 
England approved these laws, and were perhaps the real movers 
of them. They were Bible-men, and though marriage was an 
institution of God, they knew very well that the Scriptures did 
not direct how or by whom the marriage ceremony should be 
performed, and that the intervention of a priest or Levite was not 
required in the marriages of the ancient Jews, and that the mar- 
riages of the early Christians for about 200 years, were not sanc- 
tioned by the services of their ministers. In Scotland and some 
other parts of Europe, it was not necessary that marriage should 
be celebrated by a clergyman. In 1692, under the new charter, 
Massachusetts General Court directed that marriages should be 
solemnized by Justices of the Peace, and settled ministers. In a 
few years after this law, it was the general custom for pastors to 
marry. Before 1692, when magistrates married, they also made 
the prayers, but if a minister was present, he was usually invited 
to make at least one of the two prayers. 

In May, 1661, when Hadley was incorporated, William West- 
wood was authorized to join persons in marriage, or in his absence, 
one of the other commissioners, who were then, Andrew Bacon 
and Samuel Smith. In 1668, Henry Clarke was authorized to 
marry. In 1677, Liput. Samuel Smith was empowered to solem- 
nize marriages. Peter Tilton became a magistrate in 1680, and 
Capt. Aaron Cooke a justice in 1687, and they united people in 
wedlock until Mr. Chauncey was settled in 1696, and Capt. 
Cooke still later, when requested. — Mr. Russell, the first minister, 
did not marry a couple during his life, unless in the last year, 
1692. He had been three times married by a magistrate, and 
all ministers were married by magistrates previous to 1692. — 
Aaron Cooke, Jr. and Sarah Westwood were married May 20, 
1661, and were the first couple married in Hadley. 

Not much is known respecting the nuptial festivities and wed- 
ding customs in this part of the country, in the 17th and part of 
the 1 8th centuries. Marriages were occasions of joy and merri- 
ment. The groom had some new garments, and the bride had 
as rich a wedding dress as in her circumstances, could be afforded. 
Mather, in 1719, said it was expected that the newly married 
couple would appear as such, in the public assembly, on the next 
Lord's day. This custom continued more than a century after 
1 7 19. It was termed "coming out groom and bride." It still 
remains in many places. 

The following account of the marriage of Mr. Aaron Porter 
and Susanna Sewall, daughter of Stephen Sewall, Esq. of Salem, 


is from the Diary of Judge Samuel Sewall, who was a brother of 
Stephen. Mr. Aaron Porter was a son of the second Samuel 
Porter of Hadley, and was the first minister of Medford. 

"1713. Oct. 22. I go to Salem, visit Mr. Epes and Col. Hathorne. See Mr. Noyes 
marry Mr. Aaron Porter and Mrs. Susan Sewall at my brother's. Was a pretty deal of 
company present — Mr. Hirst and wife, Mr. Blower, Mr. Prescott, Mr. Tuft, senior and 
junior, Madam Leverett, Foxcroft, GofT, Kitchen; Mr. Samuel Porter the father, I should 
have said before; many young gentlemen and gentlewomen. Mr. Noyes made a speech; 
said love was the sugar to sweeten every condition in the married state. Prayed once. Did 
all very well. After the sack-posset, &c. sung the 45th Psalm from the 8th verse to the end, 
five staves. I set it to Windsor tune. I had a very good Turkey-leather Psalm-book, 
which I looked in while Mr. Noyes read, and then I gave it to the bridegroom, saying, 'I 
give you this Psalm-book, in order to your perpetuating this song, and I would have you 
pray that it may be an introduction to our singing with the choir above.' "* 

Kissing the bride was not customary in the interior of New 
England, until some time in the present century, and the practice 
is far from being general now. It was derived from the English, 
who have been notorious for kissing, on various occasions, for 
centuries. — Dancing at weddings was rare among the people, in 
most parts of New England, in the 17th century, but became very 
frequent in the i8th century. f The people of Hadley danced at 
weddings in the last century, but the practice has been uncommon 
in that town for forty years past. 

Stealing the bride, was formerly done in some places in New 
England. Madam Knight of Boston, notices in 1704, "the 
former practice among us, to steal Miss Bride." There are 
many traditions respecting it in Northampton and Hadley. 
Some young men who had not been invited to the wedding, seized 
the bride, in the street or house, and led her off, and kept her until 
they were invited to join the party. A Hadley tradition says 
they sometimes took her to a public house, and retained her until 
the groom ordered an entertainment for them. She was treated 

*I am indebted to the Rev. Samuel Sewall of Burlington, Mass. for this extract from 
the Diary of Judge Sewall. He accompanied it (1846) with observations on the forgotton 
customs of our fathers. Some of his remarks follow: — A century and a half ago, they had 
sack-posset at weddings and sung Windsor. Now not one in a hundred ever heard of sack- 
posset, and I should as soon expect to hear yankee-doodle struck up as Windsor. They 
used the old Bay Psalm-book, which was read and sung, line by line, at the social party, 
on occasions of festivity and in family worship, and was in every parlor as well as in every 
meeting-house, but is now assigned over to the antiquary and forgotton. 

In 1682, Judge Sewall was present at the marriage of Daniel Quincy and Anna Shepard. 
A magistrate married them, the two prayers were made by ministers, and the large company 
had cake, wine and beer, and singing succeeded. 

•j-A great wedding-dance took place at New London, at the house of Nathaniel Shaw, 
Esq., June 12, 1769, the day after the marriage of his son, Daniel Shaw and Grace Coit. 
92 gentlemen and ladies attended, and danced 92 jigs, 52 contra-dances, 45 minuets and 
17 hornpipes, and retired at 45 minutes past midnight. 


gently and kindly. These affairs seem to have produced no 
quarrels, but to have been sometimes an addition to the w^edding 
frolic. The last bride stolen in Hadley is said to have been 
Elizabeth, daughter of Oliver Smith, who was married to Doct. 
Job Marsh in 1783. The practice ceased in Northampton some 
years before. 

There were occasionally, second day weddings, or wedding 
festivities kept up the second day, in the last and present centuries, 
with much eating, drinking and dancing.* 

The greater part of the marriages in Hampshire county for 150 
years took place on Thursday, but many on Wednesday, and 
some on other days. Very few on Saturday, or Sunday. Mar- 
riages were usually solemnized at the residence of the bride. The 
paternal mansion seems to be the most appropriate place. — 
There were some deviations. David Hillhouse and Sarah Porter 
were married in Hadley meeting-house, Oct. 7, 1781, and a few 
couples since. — The parents of the writer were married in South- 
ampton meeting-house, Sept. i, 1774. Marriages in meeting- 
houses have been very rare. 

The marriage fee was fixed at 3 shillings in 1692, 4s. in 1716, 
1753 and 1760, and 6s. in 1787. The fee of the town clerk for the 
publishment and certificate was IS. 6d. after 1716. The minister 
or justice was to pay for recording the marriage. 

In some towns in this vicinity, in former days, when a couple 
had agreed to be united, the father of the young man went to the 
parents of the young woman, and asked leave for his son to marry 
their daughter. This was "asking leave." It was sometimes 
done by the young man himself. 

Marrying a deceased wife's sister. — The church of England, 
the church of Scotland, and the laws of England, have never 
allowed a man to marry his deceased wife's sister. The American 
colonies, including Massachusetts and Connecticut, were formerly 
equally averse to such marriages. The Court of Assistants in 
Connecticut judged that the marriage of a man at New Haven 
with his deceased wife's sister, was incestuous, and declared it 
null and void, in May, 1694. In the course of the last century, 
most men changed their views and concluded that a man might 
marry his wife's sister. Ebenezer Clark of Westhampton and 

♦February 2, 1769, Josiah Dwight of Hatfield was married, and had a two days wedding 
in Hatfield Addition, now Williamsburgh. About 18 couples attended the wedding from 
Hatfield, and had a good dinner, and spent most of the succeeding night in dancing and 
frolicking. The next morning, "we greeted the rising sun with fiddling and dancing," 
says one of the party, in his diary. 


afterwards of Lunenburg, Vt., married three sisters, daughters 
of Ebenezer Pomeroy of Hadley, in 1774, 1793 and after 1805, 
apparently without opposition or censure. Judge Story is said 
to have declared that such marriages have no immoral tendency, 
but are deemed the best sort.* 

Divorce. — It is believed that only one couple belonging to 
Hadley were ever separated by a divorce, and they were negroes. 
In January, 1752, the Council of Massachusetts granted to Ralph 
Way of Hadley, a divorce from his wife, Lois Way, on account 
of her adultery with another negro, named Boston. — There was 
a petition for a divorce from Springfield in 1687, which was unsuc- 
cessful. There was one from Northampton in 1695; the result 
is not known. Divorces were always more easily obtained in 
Connecticut than in Massachusetts. 

Courtship. — In this vicinity, where in past times, nearly all 
were working men and working women, courting was done, 
almost necessarily, after night-fall. Even those belonging to 
families considered the most respectable, often extended the hours 
of courtship to midnight, 80 or 100 years ago. When a young 
man requested a girl to spend a little time or a few hours with 
him, and she refused, he was shabbed; if she consented, he staid 
with her. These were common expressions in rural places, in 
former days.f 

By a law of Massachusetts in 1647, no one might endeavor to 
draw away the affections of a maid under pretence of marriage, 
before he had obtained liberty from her parents or governors. 
The fine for the first offense was ;^5. There were no prosecutions 
for this offense in Hampshire county, and very few any where. 

Funerals and Mourning. 

Lechford, in his "News from New England" in 1642, says — 
"At burials nothing is read, nor any funeral sermon made, but all 
the neighborhood, or a good company of them, come together by 
tolling of the bell, and carry the dead solemnly to his grave, and 
there stand by him while he is buried. The ministers are most 
commonly present." There was no prayer. 

*Muscutt, a late writer in England, says, "God's law interdicts not such a marriage. 
Common sense discountenances it not. Christian ethics disapprove it not. Yet in the eye 
of the English law, the wife is only a concubine, and the children bastards." 

■["The mode of courtship called bundling, which prevailed in some parts of Europe, was 
not uncommon in some places in New England, in the last century. Rev. Jonathan Ed- 
wards preached a sermon against it in Northampton, more than a century since. Old men 
in Hadley have no knowledge of any such practice in that town, in their day. 


The Presbyterian Church of Scotland used no funeral sermons 
nor any prayers at the burial of the dead. The Huguenots of 
France had no prayer nor sermon at funerals. 

The ministers of New England, and those of some churches in 
Europe refrained from prayers at funerals, because there was in 
the Bible neither precept nor example for such prayers. After 60 
or 70 years, a few ministers began to pray at funerals, in Massa- 
chusetts, and Mather says, about 1719, that in many towns the 
minister made a prayer at the house and a short speech at the 
grave; in other places both of these were wholly omitted. 

The funeral customs in England and other parts of Europe 
were very bad for centuries. Brand, in his Popular Antiquities, 
says the wakes or watchings with the dead, were scenes of sport, 
drinking and lewdness in England, and they still resemble Bac- 
chanalian revels. The wealthy made profuse and expensive 
funerals. Many funerals were closed with merry-makings. A 
tavern keeper in London told Mission, a continental traveler, 
about 1696, that at his wife's funeral, above 250 gallons of wine 
were drank. Funeral sermons were often preached. Dr. Sand- 
erson, bishop of Lincoln, in his will in 1662, expressed his "utter 
dislike of the flatteries commonly used in funeral sermons, and of 
the vast expenses laid out in funeral solemnities and entertain- 

The practice of partaking of wine, ardent spirits, cakes, &c. at 
funerals was brought from England to the American colonies; 
also the custom of expending large sums for gloves, rings, scarfs, 
and mourning garments. The funeral expenses charged in the 
Probate Records of Suffolk and Middlesex counties in Massa- 
chusetts are often surprisingly large, and must have greatly dimin- 
ished many estates. Men sometimes provided for their funerals 
in their wills. Edward Baker of Lynn, an ancestor of the Bakers 
of Northampton, in his will in 1685, ordered "a decent funeral 
suitable to my rank and quality." The heaviest funeral expenses 
were for mourning apparel, rings, gloves, and wine and other 
liquors. The wine for such occasions was sometimes burnt, 
spiced and sugared. In some cases, gloves were lavishly given — 
700 pairs at one funeral, 1000 pairs at another, and above 3000 
pairs and 200 rings at the funeral of A. Faneuil in Boston in 1738. 
Gold rings were given to ministers and to many others. A Boston 
minister in 1728 estimated that the rings and gloves which he 
received at funerals in a year were worth 15 pounds. The funeral 
of Gov. Burnet at Boston, Sept. 12, 1729, cost Massachusetts 
£iog'j, IIS. 3d. In 1742, the General Court passed an act 


against giving scarfs, gloves, wine, rum and rings at funerals, 
except six pairs of gloves to the bearers and one pair to the min- 
ister. Penalty, ;^50. The act was to continue only five years.* 

Funeral expenses are seldom noticed in the Probate records of 
Hampshire. The extravagance of many in Boston and the vicin- 
ity at funerals, was not imitated in these agricultural towns. 
Seldom were rings or gloves given. Cake and wine or other 
liquors were sometimes distributed. At the burial of the widow 
of John Barnard, of Hadley, in 1665, the cake and wine cost 40 
shillings. But few mourning articles were worn previous to 
1700, and the people did not indulge in expensive mourning 
down to the Revolution, except a few families. The account 
books of Hampshire traders show that few mourning goods were 
required from 1660 to 1770. They were more common the latter 
part of this period, and were then chiefly black gloves, black 
gauze, black gauze handkerchiefs, black fans, black ribbons, and 
black lustring. There were some black silk scarfs and a few 
black gowns of silk crape, but perhaps these did not always indi- 
cate mourning. A few men wore crape hatbands. Mourning 
crape called widow's crape, was seldom sold. 

At the funeral of Col. John Stoddard of Northampton, in 1748, 
some rings and gloves were given. At the funeral of the wife of 
Col. Timothy Dwight of Northampton, in 1763, 24 pairs of gloves 
were distributed. At the funerals of some persons of less note, 
six pairs of white gloves were given to the pall bearers, and one 
pair to the minister. The six pairs were laid on the coffin, three 
pairs on each side. — Gloves were distributed at the funeral of 
Rev. Dr. Samuel Hopkins of Hadley, Feb. 12, 181 1 — probably 
the last gloves given at a funeral in Hampshire. f 

Hadley Burying Ground. 

There is no record of the vote designating this place as a grave 

yard. It was reserved as early as 1661, on the meadow plain, 

adjoining the west end of the homelot of Edward Church, 16 

rods, and of the middle highway, 4 rods, making it 20 rods north 

*Some eastern towns made expensive funerals for deceased ministers, providing wine, 
rum, gloves, rings, and sometimes pipes and tobacco. The Dutch at New York provided 
for funerals, rum, beer, gloves, rings; and in 1703, at a funeral, "Soo cockles, [cookies or 
cakes] and one and a half gross of pipes'" were furnished. The funeral customs in the 
middle and southern colonies were more exceptionable than in New England. The house 
of mourning in Europe and America was often a house of drinking, and sometimes of feast- 

■j-The six pall bearers who received the gloves were four ministers — Lyman of Hatfield, 
Wells of Whately, Williams of Northampton, Parsons of Amherst; and two others. Gov- 
ernor Strong and Doct. Ebenezer Hunt of Northampton. 


and south, and it was about lo^ rods east and west. It consisted 
of two ridges, the highest in this part of the meadow, and of the 
valley between. These 210 square rods were the burial place for 
the old village of Hadley above 130 years. In 1792, 6 or 7 rods 
by 20 were added on the east side, from the homelots, (the old 
homelot was in two,) and the highway. In 1828, about 16 or 17 
rods by 20 were purchased on the east side. The yard is now not 
far from 34 rods by 20, and contains a little more than four acres. 

Almost all the grave stones erected previous to 1800 are of 
sand-stone, and many of the older ones are thick, heavy and rude. 
The five tables are of the same material. The later grave 
stones are of reddish sand-stone, and exhibit much better work- 
manship, and some have a face sculptured on the front. A 
number of slate stones have been erected. The people began to 
procure marble monuments a few years after 1800, and the greater 
part of those set up for thirty or forty years past, are of marble. 
Flowers bloom on some graves, (June, 1858,) 

There is a stone at the grave of Doct. John Westcarr, who died 
in 1675, but it seems to have been erected many years after his 
death. The oldest monuments in the yard are the tables over 
the graves of Rev. John Russell and his wife Rebekah, erected in 
1693. There are only ten stones in the yard with dates earlier 
than 1720; only ten when the town had been settled 60 years. Of 
the fathers of Hadley previous to 1663, only five have grave stones 
in Hadley grave yard, viz.. Rev. John Russell, Capt. Aaron Cooke, 
Chileab Smith, John Ingram; and the late Noah Webster set up 
a stone to the memory of his ancestor, John Webster, who died 
April 5, 1661. He was the first person buried in the yard, except- 
ing perhaps an unnamed infant of Philip Smith, that was buried 
Jan. 22, 1661.* 

There are four more grave yards in Hadley, viz., at Hockanum, 
North Hadley, Plainville, and near Sunderland. 

There was no hearse in Hadley until the year 1826. In that 
town, as in others, the dead were previously carried on a shoulder 
bier, sometimes for miles. In the winter, some were conveyed 
by sleighs. 

Titles — Mister, Goodman, &c. 
When settlements began in New England, the people of Old 
England, below the nobility, baronets and knights, and above 

*I am indebted to Mr. L. M. Boltwood of Amherst, for the name, time of decease and 
age of those persons to whose memory monuments have been erected in this burying ground, 
copied by him in 1849. The number was then about 313. 


the plebeians, were esquires and gentlemen, and they bore the 
title of Master or Mister or Mr. Lawyers, physicians, educated 
men, captains in the wars, wealthy merchants and others who 
could live without manual labor and bear the port of a gentle- 
man, were called Master and taken for gentlemen. Many of these 
gentlemen, called Master or Mister, came to America. Of 1780 
men made freemen of Massachusetts before 1649, ^bout one in 
fourteen had the title of Mr. before his name. It may have been 
given to some to whom it would not have been applied in England. 
There were a few with this title in Hadley among the first planters, 
as John Russell, the minister, John Webster, William Goodwin, 
Peter Tilton and Henry Clarke; and it was sometimes given to 
a few others. For many years, the people of Hadley would have 
been surprised, if not shocked, if a common farmer or mechanic 
had been called mister. Militia officers always had military titles.* 
Ecclesiastical titles were sparingly used. Magistrates were Mis- 
ters and Esquires; Worshipful, sometimes applied to them, was 
in Eno-land a less dignified title than that of Honorable. 

Of those below gentlemen, in England, and sometimes called 
plebeians, were the yeomen who owned or occupied land, some 
merchants, shopkeepers, artificers or mechanics, and laborers of 
various kinds. Sir Thomas Smith says, in 1563: — "Yeomen are 
not called masters, but to their surnames may add 'Goodman,' 
as Goodman White, Goodman Finch." Markham, in his "Eng- 
lish Husbandman," about 1613, says: — "A husbandman is he who 
tilleth the ground, and the ancients did call him a good man; and 
we at this day call every husbandman, in ordinary conference and 
every particular salutation, Goodman such-a-one, a title of more 
honor and virtuous note than many which precede it at feasts and 
in gaudy places." This appellation was much used among the 
husbandmen of Massachusetts, and was common in Hadley. A 
number in Hadley as in other towns were addressed and spoken 
of by their Christian name and surname only, or by one of these. 

*'''Our fathers were essentially a martial people. The warlike virtues were to them a 
necessity. Military titles were in high repute among them. They were preferred to civil 
or ecclesiastical honors. The corporal was on the road to distinction. A sergeant had 
attained distinction and his title was never omitted. An ensign or a lieutenant was lifted 
quite above the heads of his fellows. A captain was necessarily a man of great influence." 
— Bronson's History of Waterbury. 

Military titles were as common in other colonies as in those of New England. The 
council of sixteen in Virginia, in 1656, was composed of 1 1 colonels, 2 lieut. colonels and 3 
captains. The Virginia House of Burgesses, in 1666, had 26 men with a military title, 
and only 8 without such title. 



Mister was gradually extended, and became so general that it 
ceased to be a distinctive title, in the first half of the last century.* 

Female Titles. — A few women denominated Ladies, came to 
New England. It is presumed that this appellation was not often 
used in the Hampshire towns for many years, as a title or compli- 
ment. The wife and daughters of a Mister might claim to be 
called Mistress, which, abbreviated, became Mrs. and was some- 
times written Mtris. The title Miss, applied to a young female 
of good reputation, was introduced later, perhaps in 1720. It 
seems to have had a struggle with Mrs. and each was occasionally 
given to an unmarried female. Some young females were pub- 
lished in Hadley previous to their marriage, with Mrs. before their 
names, down to 1794. — The Goodman's wife was called Good- 
wife or Goody; and when he became a Mr. she might be a Mrs. 
Many women as well as men were spoken of and to by their 
names, without any addition. It is seldom that female titles are 
found in the records of towns, and those of men are often omitted. 

Christian Names. 

Christian names of Hadley children from 1660 to 1700, including some born after 1700, 
belonging to families in which the births began before that date; with the number of chil- 
dren that bore each name. Those born on the west side of the river, which was a part of 
Hadley some years, are not included. 





























One name. 





























































































One name, 









Names given to only one child. — Males. — Robert, Solomon, Chileab, Peletiah, Eliakim, 
Preserved, Andrew, Henry, Abraham, Adam, Elihu, Caleb, Edmund, Ezekiel, Job, Peter, 
Enos, Cotton, Phinehas, Antony, Benoni, Zechariah. — 22. — Females. — Elinor, Hope, 
Jerusha, Mindwell, Margaret, Dinah, Susanna, Theoda, Grace, Jane, Frances, Deliver- 
ance. — 12. 

*Rev. Thomas Ruggles of Guilford, Conn., in a short History of that place written in 
1769, says the first settlers were gentlemen called Mr. and the commonalty named Goodman 
or Neighbor such-a-one. He continues: — "How greatly are times now changed! Every 
man almost is called Mr. and every woman Miss, Madam or Lady." 


There were 382 male children, of 61 different names, and 330 
female children, of 38 different names. The males were about 
100 to 86 females — an unusual inequality. The people of Hadley 
have no reason to be ashamed of the names which their ancestors 
gave to their children, though many of them are seldom now 
given. The planters of Hadley perused the Bible, and derived 
most of their names from it, rejecting the most harsh and uncouth 
Scripture names. They had a few names from virtues, &c., as 
Mercy, Thankful, Prudence, Grace, Hope, Experience; and some 
Saxon and Norman names, as William, Richard, Edward, Henry, 
&c. Two of the children were named from the surname of the 
mother, viz., Westwood and Cotton. More than half the males 
had one of the first six names in the list of males, and half the 
females had one of the first four names of females. Of 226 wives 
named in Hadley from 1660 to 1720, 146 bore the name of Mary, 
Sarah, Hannah, Elizabeth or Abigail. Of 147 persons in Hadley 
valuation in 1731, half had one of these five names, — John, Sam- 
uel, Ebenezer, Joseph, William.* 

Double Christian Names. — The people of Old and New Eng- 
land were generally satisfied with one baptismal name until the 
1 8th century. Men with a middle name are rarely found previous 
to 1700. In New England, the number of double Christian names 
was small previous to the Revolution, and such names did not 
become numerous till after 1800. Nine persons in Hadley had a 

*A few names seem to have comprehended more than half the people of Old England as 
well as of New England. In many lists of men in England, from 1600 to 1700, seven names 
included above one-half, and in almost every list, these most common names were John, 
Thomas, Richard, William, Edward, Henry, Robert. Of 800 ofEcers of the king's army in 
Sept. 1640, more than half bore these names. Of 578 persons appointed by the Parliament 
in 1643 '•° ^'"^ ^^ assessing taxes, about two-thirds bore the same seven names. Of 903 
baronets created from 161 1 to 1686, the seven names included many more than half. Of 
a large number of men, named in a History of the county of Essex, England, before and 
after i6co, half had the same seven names. Of a long list of Esses females, nearly half were 
named Mary, Elizabeth, Anne or Margaret. Names of Puritans and anti-Puritans were 
very similar in England. The names of the emigrants to New England did not differ much 
from the names generally used in England. Of above 1200 admitted as freemen of Mass- 
achusetts before 1641, more than half had one of the same seven names. There was a great 
increase of Bible names after the emigration to New England. The names of half the grad- 
uates of Harvard College previous to 1701 were John, Samuel, Joseph, Thomas, Nathaniel. 
It appears by a remark of Montaigne, that the Huguenots of France preferred Bible-names. 

The Puritans had some awkward names, but it seems that many of the ridiculous names 
attributed to them, in England, by Hume and others, are fictitious. Says the Pictorial 
History of England, 1603 to 1660, "nearly all the ridiculous names, given to the Independ- 
ents at this time, are pure inventions, made fifty years after by a clergyman of the estab- 
lished church." The names of men on the fictitious juries of Hume and Lower, and the 
"new names'' noticed by Camden, are not found among those who came to New England. 
A few of the shorter ones were given to children born in New England, but not often. 


middle name before the year 1776, and five of them were named 
from their maternal grandfather. 

Old Style and New Style. 

Julius Caesar made a reform in the calendar, 46 years before 
Christ. His solar year consisted of 365 days and 6 hours, and the 
6 hours were taken into account, by making every fourth year of 
366 days. This manner of computing time is old style. There 
was an error in it, the true solar year being 11 minutes and some 
seconds short of 365 J days, and this difference made a whole day 
in about 129 years, and before the year 1582, the vernal equinox 
occurred on the nth of March, 13 or 14 days sooner than in the 
time of Caesar. Pope Gregory XIII. introduced the new style in 
1582, by taking out 10 days from the month of October, which 
corrected the calendar back to the Council of Nice, 325 years 
after Christ. To countervail in future the excess of 11 minutes 
and 12 or 15 seconds in a year, it was determined to omit three 
days in four centuries, by making common years of three leap 
years, viz., 1700, 1800 and 1900. Some English philosophers and 
others objected to this imperfect reform of the calendar, this going 
back to the Council of Nice instead of the Christian era, and there 
were other objections, and England continued to follow the old 
style till 1752, which differed 10 days from the new style until 
1700, and II days after that year. By an act of Parliament, ii 
days were taken from the old calendar in 1752, the 3d of September 
being reckoned the 14th, and England and her colonies conformed 
to the new style.* 

*In New England diaries for 1752 and in correct almanacs, September has only 19 days, 
and the first four days are'thus numbered: — 
September, 1752. 

1. Tuesday. 

2. Wednesday. 

14. Thursday. 

15. Friday. 

One almanac-maker in New England (and perhaps more than one,) made his almanac 
for 1752 according to the old style. Madam Porter, wife of Eleazar Porter, Esq. of Hadley, 
kept interleaved almanacs many years, where she noted various occurrences, and she had one 
of these old style almanacs for 1752 and had to alter with her pen the number of every day 
after September 2d. The maker's name is torn off. 

Gregory's reform in the calendar was beneficial, but his object was more superstitious 
than scientific. The learned Benedictine monks, who wrote in French, "L'Art de Verifier 
les Dates," remark that "the principal object of Gregory was to regulate the celebration of 
Easter." Burke says the dispute about the time of celebrating Easter was "one of the 
most trivial controversies of ecclesiastical discipline;" yet astronomy and chronology gained 
something from this trivial dispute. 

The French work referred to, in 23 volumes, furnishes much information in regard to 
different forms of the year, and different modes of dating. 


The Beginning of the Year. — Julius Caesar began the year with 
the first of January, but some centuries after Christ, the priests 
and others unwisely varied from that day, and there were many 
beginnings in different parts of Europe, as January I, (used by a 
few), March i, March 25, Easter in March or April, December 
25, and three or four other days. March 25 and Dec. 25 were 
the most common.* When the first of January was restored, after 
some centuries, it was a part of the new style, and the other begin- 
nings of the year became old style. England long used Dec. 25, 
but began to use March 25 from the 12th century, and this was 
the legal beginning of the year in church and state, until 1752, 
when the first of January began the year by act of Parliament. 
The first of January had long been reckoned as one beginning of 
the year, and English almanacs began the year with January 
more than 250 years ago. Many in England and America used 
a double date to distinguish the "mongrel time" from January 
I to March 24, inclusive, and set down both years thus — Jan. 20, 
167!, March 4, I70g. The upper figures, 3 and 7, denoted the 
year beginning March 25, and the lower figures, 4 and 8, the year 
commencing Jan. i. In the same part of the year, single dates 
were often used as well as double ones. The two beginnings of 
the year produced confusion in dates in Old England and New 

In New England, for a time, the first of March was accounted 
the beginning of the year by some, and the months were numbered 
first, second, third, fourth, &c. as 20th of 3d mo. for 20th of May; 
loth 8mo. or 10 — 8, for loth of October. This method of com- 
puting time did not lessen the disorder in dates. It was far from 
being general in New England; was more used in the records of 
churches than in those of towns. In many records, it continued 

♦When men began to celebrate the birth of Christ, two or three centuries after that event, 
they were ignorant respecting the year, month and day in which he was born, and the time 
of his birth is still unknown. Learned writers suppose the 25th of December was selected 
because the sun then began to return towards the north, and was deemed emblematical of 
the rising of the Sun of Righteousness. From this date, men counted back 9 months to 
the 25th of March, which they called the day of the Conception of Christ, or Annunciation 
day. And a large portion of Europe in the middle ages and after, began the year with one 
of these days. — Men did not begin to count years from Jesus Christ until the 6th century. 

Rev. H. H. Milman, a clergyman of the church of England, says in his "History of 
Christianity,"— "The year in which Christ was born is still contested. There is still more 
uncertainty concerning the time of the year. Where there is and can be no certainty, it is 
the wisest course to acknowledge our ignorance, and not to claim the authority of historic 
truth for that which is purely conjectural." He thinks the time of Christ's birth is of no 
importance, and is satisfied with the traditionary day. — Dr. Adam Clarke, the Commentator, 
says "Fabricius gives a catalogue of 136 different opinions concerning the year of Christ's 
birth; and as to his birth-day, that has been placed by Christian sects and learned men in 
every month of the year." 


but a few years, in some, many years. It was gradually given up, 
and March 25 became usually the first day of the year, as in Eng- 
land, and so continued until 1752, though January i was often 
referred to as new year's day, and New England almanacs began 
the year with January before 1700. After Hampshire county was 
incorporated, the recorders of the county and of the towns in it, 
commonly began the year with March 25, but there were many 
deviations; they used both single and double dates between Dec. 
31 and March 25. In Hadley, the town clerk sometimes seemed 
to reckon January i as the beginning of the year, long before 1752. 
In this History of Hadley, the dates are given as if the year 
began on the first of January, in new style, but with respect to the 
excess of 11 days before 1752, the old style and old records are 


The second Indian War, 1688 to 1698 — Six persons killed at Northfield — Presents to the 
Maquas — Destruction of Schenectady — Troubles with Albany Indians — Persons killed 
at Deerfield and Brookfield — Murder of Richard Church of Hadley, and trial and exe- 
cution of two Indians — Attack in Hatfield meadows — Expenses of the war — Pay of 
soldiers — The war in Hampshire — Hampshire soldiers — Taxes — Palisades — Contribu- 

Of the five towns in Hampshire, that were broken up by the 
Indian war in 1675, Suffield began to be re-settled in 1677, Deerfield 
in 1682 or 1683, Northfield about 1685, and Brookfield not long 
after. No record alludes to any settlers at Swampfield, (Sunder- 
land.) Enfield, a new town, was incorporated, in 1683, and 
Hampshire had ten towns and plantations before 1688. There 
were very few settlers at Brookfield. 

In 1688, while New England was under the despotic govern- 
ment of Andros, another Indian war began in Maine, and in 
Hampshire county. In the latter part of July, five friendly In- 
dians living at Spectacle Pond near Springfield, were killed by 
other Indians. A few days after, eleven Indians appeared near 
Northfield, and some of them were recognized as Indians who 
formerly lived in these parts. On the i6th of August, three men, 
two women and a girl were killed at Northfield, and it was believed 
that they were murdered by these Indians. Major Pynchon sent 
soldiers to Northfield, and thirteen men were sent up from Hart- 
ford. By order of Gov. Andros, in November, 60 Connecticut 


men were posted at Northfield, under Captain Jonathan Bull, 
during the winter. The destruction of six persons at Northfield 
is not noticed by any historian, and their names cannot now be 

The revolution in England, which drove king James into exile 
and placed William and Mary upon the throne, began in Novem- 
ber, 1688. On the i8th of April, 1689, the people of Boston and 
other towns seized Gov. Andros and his associates, and restored 
the old governor and magistrates. The revolution in England 
was followed by war between England and France, which extended 
to their colonies in America, and for the first time, the people of 
New England were involved in a desolating war with the French 
in Canada and their Indian allies. — Most of the attacks in 1689 
were directed against New Hampshire and Maine, both under 
the government of Massachusetts. The frontier which Massa- 
chusetts had to defend, extended from the Connecticut to the 
Kennebec and beyond. 

"The tears, fears and groans of the broken remnant of North- 
field" is the beginning of a petition from that place to the General 
Court, dated June 27, 1689, in the hand-writing of Rev. John 
Russell of Hadley. They say that they had 25 families before the 
six persons were slain by the Indians, and that half had since 
deserted the place, and only 12 families remained. They asked 
for advice and help. Peter Tilton, Samuel Partridge and John 
King were appointed to order matters at Northfield. About 70 
souls, of whom only 15 were men, remained in the place until the 
spring of 1690, when Northfield was abandoned the second time, 
and remained desolate 25 years. Hadley was again the most 
northern town on the east side of the river. 

In August, 1689, Massachusetts and Connecticut sent agents 
to Albany, with Major Pynchon at the head, to make presents 
to the Maquas and river Indians, and engage them against the 
Indian enemy. (See page 124.) Speeches were made, and the 
chiefs of the Five Nations used the customary, unmeaning expres- 
sions, and made deceptive promises. The agents gave to them 
500 pounds of powder, looo pounds of lead, 150 yards of duffel, 
500 guilders in wampum, 90 shirts, and 40 pounds of tobacco, 

*Pynchon's Letters, and the depositions of Thomas Wells of Deerfield, and of Micah 
Mudge of Northfield, and other papers relating to these events, are in the Massachusetts 
Archives. — Gov. Andros made a short visit at Hadley, apparently in September, 1688, and 
and sent to Northampton for the committee appointed to re-settle Northfield. He did not 
cross the river. — Mr. Warham Mather of Northampton preached at Northfield 6 months, 
after the 6 persons were killed. 


and they made presents to the sachems privately, and entertained 
100 of their people with beef, pork, bread, beer, &c. They also 
made presents to the Hudson's River Indians, whom they named 
Mahikanders and Scachkooks. "Albany is a dear place," said 
Major Pynchon, and it was so to the people of Massachusetts, who 
paid the bills. Connecticut paid only a small part in 1689. — In 
March, 1690, Robert Livingston asked of Massachusetts, 400 or 
500 pounds worth of goods as presents to the Five Nations, to 
counteract the attempts of the French to withdraw them from their 
alliance with the English. 

The leading men at Albany, fearing an attack from the French 
and Indians, desired the aid of 100 men from New England. The 
preservation of Albany was important to New England, and Con- 
necticut sent about 66 soldiers, and 24 were taken from the county 
of Hampshire, and they left Westfield, Nov. 18, 1689, under 
Capt. Jonathan Bull. Capt. Bull found the people of Albany 
and Schnectady divided into two parties, and bitterly opposed to 
each other. While the inhabitants of Schnectady were quarreling 
and neglecting the means of defense, they were attacked by the 
French and Indians on the night of Feb. 8, 1690, and about 62 
were slain and 28 made captives, including five killed and five 
taken, of Capt. Bull's company. Some from Hampshire were 
taken, and perhaps some slain.* 

The year 1690 was one of great calamities and much distress 
to New England. The French and Indians made successful 
attacks on the northern and eastern towns; an expedition against 
Quebec, with more than 2000 troops from Massachusetts, failed, 
and several vessels and many men were lost; a land army that 
was to attack Montreal, was unable to proceed beyond the south- 
ern point of Lake Champlain. 

Hampshire county escaped the ravages of war in 1689 and 1690, 
but there were many alarms, and men were often called to arms. 
There was a garrison at Deerfield, and scouts were sent up to 
West River, and smaller scouts were sent out frequently from the 
other towns. In 1690, Major Pynchon detached 40 men from 
Hampshire, to join the army at Albany, but there were so many 
reports of Indians at the Falls above Squakeag, at Coasset and 
other places, that the 40 men were not sent out of the county.f 

*Of the Hampshire men, Joseph Marks was carried to Canada; Samuel Beaman was 
taken, but escaped. Robert Alexander and Jonathan Church were slain, or died of sickness; 
David Burt, Jr. of Northampton, was a captive in Canada, 1690, and never returned. 

■[■These alarms brought up Capt. Samuel Talcott of Wethersfield, with his company of 
horsemen, in June, 1690, who remained but a few days. A company from Connecticut, 
under Capt. Bull, were at Deerfield in January and February, 1691. 



On the 2d of July, Hadley scouts espied an Indian, and discovered 
the tracks of others, "about Swampfield mill."* 

Small parties of Maquas and Albany Indians, and others pre- 
tending to be from New York, came into the Hampshire towns, 
and some were insolent and used threats. Two were arrested in 

1690, and one of them was shot at Deerfield, in attempting to 
escape. These things brought complaints from the Maquas. 

New Troubles with Indians in 1691. — On the 2d of December, 

1691, Major Pynchon informed the governor and council, that in 
November, about 150 Indians, men, women and children, came 
to Deerfield from the vicinity of Albany, and settled under the 
side of the mountain, about a mile southerly from the town. The 
men had written passes from the mayor of Albany; they employed 
themselves in hunting, and left the women and children at the 
wigwams. They had been quiet with one or two exceptions; 
some of them were supposed to be former enemies who settled 
near Albany. 

They professed to be friendly, but the people of Hampshire 
were afraid they would prove unfriendly, and the committees of 
the militia of the towns of Northampton, Hadley, Hatfield and 
Deerfield met Jan. i, 1692, and sent a letter to the governor and 
council. They estimated the Indians at 40 or 50 fighting-men, 
and 100 women and children. Major Pynchon again wrote, and 
said some of the Indians had set up their wigwams near Hatfield. 
"They are very unacceptable to our people," said Major P. and 
should they be false, could do much harm. The reason of their 
coming was the scarcity of provisions about Albany. f The gov- 
ernor and council replied, that it was best to observe the motions 
of the Indians, avoid giving offense, take care that strong drink 
was not sold to them, write to the mayor of Albany, and keep 
good watches. — Some regulations were proposed to the Indians, 
Jan. 18, to which they consented. As to strong drink, they said, 
"our young men and squaws will buy liquor, and your English 
will sell it. "I Most of these Indians returned to Hudson's River 
in May, 1692. 

About the first of February, 1692, Capt. William Whiting of 
Hartford came up with 50 soldiers to garrison Deerfield a few 
weeks, Major Pynchon having written to Connecticut for aid. 

♦These words of Major Pynchon are the only intimation that there was a mill at Swamp- 
field. Probably only the foundation or beginning of a mill. 

•j-It may be inferred that game had become more plenty in the Hampshire woods, after 
the Indians left in Philip's war. 

|The Indians were right. There were men in Hampshire then who would sell liquor 
regardless of consequences, and there are such men now. 


When the ice was thick upon Lake Champlain, which was usually 
in January and February, the people of Hampshire and Albany 
apprehended an attack from Canada. After the ice broke up, 
there was not much fear of an assault, till the trees were covered 
with leaves. 

The county of Hampshire escaped the attacks of the enemy, 
four years in succession, viz., 1689, 1690, 1691 and 1692. Reports 
of danger were frequent, and Major Pynchon said in 1692, "strict 
watches, wards and scouts we keep in all these towns, and im- 
prove four men allowed by the country, in scouting up the river." 

On the 6th of June, 1693, three or four persons were killed or 
severely wounded at Deerfield, in the family of Hepzibah Wells,* 
widow of Lieut. Thomas Wells; and Thomas Broughton, his 
wife and three children were slain. These two families lived on 
the west side of the street near the north end. Soldiers were sent 
to Deerfield from the towns below; and two companies from Con- 
necticut who remained but a few days. Another company, under 
Capt. William Whiting, came later and remained three months. 
Canada Indians probably committed these murders, but some 
New York Indians were at first suspected, and two were confined. 
Their friends complained to Gov. Fletcher of New York, and he 
wrote to Connecticut and Massachusetts; he said the Indians were 
much displeased with New England, and in danger of being drawn 
off "by your rigor and French bribes." Gov. Phipps ordered the 
two Indians to be released, but they escaped before the order 

On Thursday, the 27th of July, 1693, a party of 26 Canada 
Indians, killed at Brookfield, near the Boston road, east of the 
garrison house, Rebekah, the wife of Joseph Wolcott and her 
two daughters, Joanna, aged 6, and Hannah, aged 2 years, 
Thomas Lawrence, and Joseph Mason and son; and they took 
Daniel Lawrence and Mason's wife and her infant, and they 
killed the infant at night. John Lawrence, brother of Thomas 
and Daniel, rode speedily to Springfield for assistance, there 
being only five or six men at the garrison house. Major Pynchon 

*Widow Wells, who was a Buel of Windsor, went to Connecticut to get surgical aid for 
her wounded children, one or two of whom had been scalped. The healing process was 
long and expensive. The General Court of Connecticut passed the following order, Oct. 
II, 1694. 

"Widow Wells of Deerfield motioned that she might have liberty to crave the charity of 
the good people of this colony for her relief of the great charge she hath been at in curing 
the wounds of her children, received by the Indians. This court recommends to the con- 
gregations in Windsor, Hartford, Wethersfield, and Farmington, to be charitably helpful to 
the woman therein." 


called out 20 men from SpringField and 8 from Westfteld, and sent 
a post to Hadley for 30 men from Northampton, Hadley and Hat- 
field, all to be commanded by Capt. Thomas Colton of Springfield. 
The 28 soldiers reached Brookfield on Friday, at 2 p. m., and 
buried the dead, and the 30 arrived about sunset. On Saturday, 
the 29th, Capt. Colton left 16 men at the garrison, and with 
42 followed the track of the Indians northerly, and came to a 
pond where the Indians lodged the second night, which they 
judged to be 30 miles* from Brookfield. A few miles from the 
pond, the way became very difficult for horses, and 19 men were 
left to bring on the horses, and Capt. Colton and 23 resolute men 
pursued on foot. On Sabbath morning, the 23 men started early, 
and about sunrise, discovered the enemy "in a most hideous, 
thick, woody place," where they could hardly be seen. Capt. 
Colton made signs to his men to advance and fire upon them, 
which they did. The Indians were at breakfast, and were sur- 
prised and terrified, and all that could, instantly disappeared in 
the thicket, leaving their prisoners, ammunition, &c. Capt. Col- 
ton saw four that were killed, and the soldiers said six or seven 
were killed. The company recovered the two captives. Mason's 
wife and Daniel LawTence, and brought away 9 guns, 20 hatchets, 
4 cutlasses, 16 or 18 horns of powder, and two barks full of powder, 
neatly covered. They returned to Brookfield that day, and came 
home on Monday, leaving 6 or 8 at the garrison house. f 

The General Court gave the men ;^40, and what was taken 
from the enemy, to be shared equally. $ 

In August, 1694, Commissioners from Massachusetts, Connect- 
icut, New York and New Jersey, guarded by 60 horsemen from 
Connecticut, met the Indian sachems at Albany, and loaded 
them with presents, to secure their attachment to the cause of the 
English. The expenses of Massachusetts were £^J0, and of Con- 
necticut, including her dragoons, about as much. 

September 15, 1694, M. Castreen and Indians attacked the 
fort at Deerfield, and were repulsed. John Bement of Enfield, 
and Richard Lyman of Northampton, of the garrison, were 
wounded. Daniel Severance, a lad, was killed in the meadow. 

♦Soldiers' miles in the woods were too many. The pond may have been 15 or 20 miles 
from Brookfield. 

■j-This account is from Major Pynchon's Letters in the Massachusetts Archives. — This 
pursuit of Indians into swamps and thickets, though successful, was rash and dangerous. 

jThe officers of the Northampton militia company objected to the equal division of the 
plunder; they said much plunder was left at the place of assault which might have been 
brought away by men who came away empty, and that half of those left with the horses were 
not needed for that purpose, but were unwilling to go further. "It seems to be hard, they 
said, that valor and cowardice should have the same reward." 


Hannah Beaman, wife of Simon Beaman, kept a school north of 
the pahsade, and she and her scholars ran to the fort, and though 
fired upon, escaped unhurt. — John Lawrence was slain in Brook- 
field in 1694. He had lived some years in Hadley, and Law- 
rence's bridge and Lawrence's plain were named from him. 

Some of the Albany Indians, called also River Indians, who 
lived above and below Albany, came to Connecticut River every 
year, game being much more plenty here. A company of them 
came to Hatfield, Aug. 9, 1695. On the loth of August, eight or 
nine Albany Indians who were hunting near Nashawelet* River, 
were killed by hostile Indians. Major Pynchon sent up to Nash- 
awelet, a company of horsemen under Capt. Colton, from Spring- 
field and the towns above, but they did not find the enemy. 

On the i8th of August, 1695, five Deerfield men set out for 
the mill, on horses with bags of grain, and when they had gone 
about a mile southward, they were fired upon by seven or eight 
Indians who were concealed near the road, and Joseph Barnard 
was sorely wounded and fell from his horse. The others set him 
upon his horse with one to hold him on, when another shot 
killed his horse. They then put him upon one of their horses, 
when a gun was fired and he was again hit; yet they all reached 
the garrison, unharmed, except Joseph Barnard, who died on the 
6th of September.f The Indians were pursued but not overtaken. 

In September, 1695, Indians were lurking about the Hamp- 
shire towns, and were seen near Deerfield, Northampton and 
Hadley. Men were frequently out, ranging the woods. 

Deerfield was a much exposed place, and many attacks of 
the enemy were directed against the inhabitants of that town. A 
garrison was there, from the Hampshire towns, and sometimes 
from Connecticut. 30 Connecticut soldiers were there in January 
and February, 1695, and 30 were sent up in August. In 
September, 1695, there were 24 men at Deerfield and 8 at Brook- 
field from the five old Hampshire towns, and 16 more were sent 
to Deerfield, Sept. 30. Some of these men were scouting daily. 

On the i6th of September, 1696, the Indians captured John 
Gillet up Green River, above Deerfield, and came to the village 
and took Daniel Belden and two children, Nathaniel and Esther; 
killed his wife Elizabeth and three children, Daniel, John and 

*So Major Pynchon wrote the name of the stream, now spelled Ashuelot. The Indians 
had the sound of N. at the beginning of the word, as in Nashua. 

■j-Major Pynchon wrote that Joseph Barnard was "a very useful and helpful man in that 
place, so much under discouragement, and they will the more find and feel the want of him." 
He was a son of Francis Barnard of Hadley. Hannah Beaman of Deerfield, the school 
dame, was his sister. 


Thankful; and wounded Samuel and Abigail, who recovered, 
though Samuel's skull was fractured. 

Murder of Richard Church of Hadley. 
On the 5th of October, 1696, a murder was committed in 
Hadley, which produced a great excitement in the county, and 
occasioned the capital punishment of two of the New York 
Indians. Richard Church of Hadley, tailor, aged 27, and re- 
cently married, was slain by some of the Hudson's River Indians. 
He was a son of Samuel Church, deceased, and grandson of 
Richard Church, a first settler. The following account is gath- 
ered from the testimony and many other papers, which are still 
extant in the Archives at Boston. Eight or ten families of the 
Albany Indians lived near Hatfield, as in preceding years, and on 
the first of October, four of these Indians went up Hadley Mill 
River to hunt, though they had been ordered not to hunt on the 
east side of the Connecticut. Their names were Mahweness or 
Mowenas, Mahquolous or Moquolas, Wenepuck, and Pemeque- 
noxet or Pameconoset. When they were returning on the 5th, 
and were about two miles from Hadley village, in a north-easterly 
direction, apparently in the vicinity of Mount Warner, they 
found Richard Church hunting in the woods, and shot him, a 
little before sunset. Samuel Barnard and Ebenezer Smith of 
Hadley had been hunting with Church that afternoon, but he 
had parted from them; and sometime after he left them, they 
heard the reports of two guns, near together, followed by a shout. 
They returned home, and as the evening advanced, and Church 
did not return, they and the people of Hadley believed that he 
had been killed by a party of the enemy. Messengers were sent 
to Northampton and Hatfield, and many men from the three 
towns assembled at Hadley, and went into the woods after mid- 
night. They were joined by some friendly Woodstock Indians 
under Peter Aspinwall. They found the body of Church towards 
morning; a bullet had been shot through his head, an arrow stuck 
in his side, his gun and part of his clothes were gone, and he was 
scalped. Some of the men conveyed the body to the house of his 
mother, widow Mary Church, and about 40 others followed 
the tracks of three or four Indians, from the place where the body 
was found to the west end of Mount Toby, where they came in 
sight of four Indians in the woods, and captured one; three es- 
caped and came into Hatfield, where they were apprehended 
that day, October 6, and the Indians at Hatfield were disarmed 
and secured; there were 8 men besides the four taken, 9 squaws 


and 23 children. There were others at Deerfield. — The four 
Indians were examined, Oct. 6, before three Justices, and the 
ministers of Northampton and Hatfield were present. The 
Indians were kept singly, and all at first denied, but Pameque- 
noxet was taken to the place of the murder, and there without 
force or threats, he owned that he saw Mahweness and Mah- 
quolous kill the man with their gun and bows and arrows, and 
he showed where they stood when they did it, and where he and 
Wenepuck stood. Being brought back, he owned the same before 
the justices and others. Wenepuck was then called and owned 
the same. Mahquolous being brought in, admitted that Mah- 
weness killed the man, but did not implicate himself. Mahwe- 
ness denied all, and said the others were liars. The next week, 
Oct. 12, Joseph Hawley and Joseph Parsons of Northampton, 
with eight others, took Wenepuck and Mahquolous towards the 
place of the murder, in two companies, the two Indians being 
about a mile apart, leaving the Indians to lead. Wenepuck went 
directly to the spot, and pointed out the trees at which, as he 
said, the two Indians stood when they killed Church, and the 
trees at which the other two stood, and they were the same trees 
that Pemequenoxet showed, the week before. Wenepuck was 
then taken away into a swamp, and Mahquolous came to the 
same place, and showed the same trees, and said that Mahweness 
killed the man. 

The others constantly affirmed that Mahquolous was active 
with Mahweness in the murder. Martha Wait of Hatfield testi- 
fied that Mahquolous said at her house, that he would kill a 
Hadley man because Hadley men threatened them when they 
hunted in Hadley woods. 

A court of Oyer and Terminer was holden at Northampton 
on the 2ist of October, 1696, to try the Indians. Lt. Gov. 
Stoughton and council had specially commissioned to hold this 
court, John Pynchon, Samuel Partrigg, Joseph Hawley and 
Aaron Cooke, Esquires, and Joseph Parsons, Gentleman.* 

*John Pynchon, 3d of Springfield, was Clerk, EbenezerPomery of Northampton, acted as 
king's Attorney, Richard Webls and William Holton of Northampton, were Interpreters. 
Samuel Porter of Hadley, was the county Sheriff. 

The grand-jury. — Preserved Clapp, foreman, John Taylor, Isaac Sheldon, Enos Kings- 
ley, John Parsons, Thomas Lyman, William Holton and Samuel Wright of Northampton; 
Nehemiah Dickinson, Jonathan Marsh, George Stillman, and Samuel Barnard of Hadley; 
and Joseph Belknap, Samuel Belding, Samuel Dickinson and John White of Hatfield. 

The petit jury. — John Holyoke, Esq. foreman and Thomas Colton of Springfield; John 
King, Medad Pomery, Judah Wright and John Clark of Northampton; Timothy Nash, 
Daniel Marsh, Thomas Hovey, of Hadley; John Coleman, Daniel White and Eleazar Frary 
of Hatfield. 


Mowenas and Moquolas were indicted as principals, and 
Wenepuck and Pameconeset as accessories. All the Indians from 
Hatfield and the vicinity were present. Each of the four was tried, 
and each was declared guilty by the jury. Only the principals 
were sentenced, and they were to be shot to death on the 23d of 
October, about 2, P. M. and they were executed at Northampton. 
These were the first executions in Hampshire County.* 

This event disturbed the Indians about Hudson's River, and 
being misled by various false reports, they became incensed 
against New England, pretending that the two Indians were 
innocent. By their complaints, they much annoyed Gov. Fletcher 
of New York, and many letters passed between him and Lieut. 
Gov. Stoughton of Massachusetts, and the correspondence did 
not cease till May, 1697. A detail of the evidence and of the pro- 
ceedings of the Court, signed by the Justices, was sent to Lt. 
Gov. Stoughton, who sent a copy to Gov. Fletcher. The two 
accessories, who were not sentenced, were at liberty in February. 

The Albany Indians continued to dwell between Hatfield and 
Deerfield until the latter part of April, 1697, when they departed, 
and did not come again. They had been the source of much 
disquiet and trouble in Hampshire. 

The Treaty of Peace at Ryswick between England and France, 
was proclaimed at Boston, Dec. 10, 1697. Some of the Indians 
continued hostilities several months longer. 

Sergeant Samuel Field of Hatfield, was slain by Indians, July 
13, 1697. — On the 15th of July, 1698, four Indians came into the 
upper part of the North meadow in Hatfield, where men and boys 
were hilling Indian corn, and killed John Billings, aged 24, and 
Nathaniel Dickinson, Jr., aged 13, and took Samuel Dickinson, 
aged II, and a lad named Charley. They shot at Nathaniel 
Dickinson, the father, and killed his horse, but he escaped. The 

*An order from John Pynchon and Samuel Partrigg, dated at Northampton, Oct. 23, 
1696, after mentioning the crime and sentence of Mowenas, required the Sheriff of Hamp- 
shire "to take Mowenas from the place where he is now in custody, to the place of execution, 
and cause the sentence to be executed upon him." 

The sheriff certified on the back of the warrant, Oct. 23, that he "caused the within 
mentioned Mowenas to be taken to the place of execution, and there to be shot to death about 
two of the clock on the said day." Signed by Samuel Porter, Sheriff of Hampshire. 

The warrant and certificate in regard to the execution of Moquolas were the same. — 
Undoubtedly a great number of people assembled to see the two Indians "shot to death." 
The place of execution in Northampton is not known. 

The expenses incurred in consequence of this murder were £31.16.0. John Pynchon 
received 5 shillings per day, and the other Justices, 4s. Grand and petit jurors, 2s. a day. 
Guarding the Indians was i s. 6d. to 2s. for a day and night. Provisions for Indians, 6 pence 
a day. Blacksmith for irons, 8s. It is believed that there was no prison in Northampton. 


Indians had canoes on the river, and were not found until a 
scout of three Northampton men, and eleven men from the town 
and garrison of Deerfield, went up the river many miles above 
that place, and lay in wait; when the Indians came along in their 
canoes, on the other side, they killed or severely wounded two 
of them, and rescued the two lads, but lost one of their party, 
Nathaniel Pomery of Deerfield, aged i8. Benjamin Wright of 
Northampton was the leader. The General Court gave these 
soldiers £,11. 

In this war often years, sometimes called King William's war. 
New England lost some hundred lives, a great amount of prop- 
erty, and numerous captives were carried to Canada. The gov- 
ernment of Massachusetts expended in the war more than 150,000 
pounds, (500,000 dollars.) About half of the expense, exclusive 
of the Quebec expedition, was for the defense of Maine, and 
much was expended for New Hampshire. Not a great number 
of Indians were slain. The bounty offered for Indian heads or 
scalps was at first 8 to 10 pounds, and was increased in some 
cases to 50 pounds.* 

Hampshire county suffered much less than some other frontiers; 
yet at least 28 of the inhabitants were slain, and several captured. 
Seven or eight Indians may have been slain in the county. North- 
field was the only town deserted. The people of Deerfield were 
always in danger, and as Major Pynchon said, "continually 
pecked at" by the enemy. The war expenses of Massachusetts 
in Hampshire, during the last five years of the war, averaged 
above ;^500 a year, and more than two-thirds of this was for the 
pay of soldiers and provisions at Deerfield; the rest was for 
Brookfield, scouting, &c. Considerable sums were paid by the 
county and towns for scouting. The soldiers of Connecticut, 
when in this county, were paid by that colony and supplied 
with provisions at the expense of Massachusetts. These soldiers 

*Wages of officers and soldiers. — In 1696 and in other years, a private had 6 shillings per 
week, drummer and corporal, 7s., clerk and sergeant, 9s., ensign, 12s., lieutenant, 15s., 
captain, 30s., major, 50s., chaplain, 20s., surgeon, 20s. — Regular troopers or cavalry, each 
furnishing his own horse. Common trooper, los., trumpeter, clerk and corporal, 12s., 
quarter-master, 15s., cornet, 20s., lieutenant, 25s., captain, 40s. — Dragoons or common 
soldiers with horses, 8s. These wages seem not to differ much from those in Philip's war. 
— A post had 4 pence a mile one way, and bore the charges of himself and horse. 

Subsistence for soldiers. — In 1696, the price of food for soldiers not stationary was 8 
pence per day; for those in garrison, 3s. 6d. per week. The soldiers were well supplied 
with food. Many were billeted in families and lived as they did. Others had pork or beef, 
bread or dry biscuit, and peas. In some expeditions, they carried tlie Indian food called 
Nocake, which was Indian corn parched and beaten into meal. — Rum, sugar, pipes and 
tobacco were to be provided for an expedition to Maine in September, 1689. — Keeping a 
horse at grass a day and night was 3 pence, and at hay and provender, 6 pence. 


commonly came up on horseback; and much of the scouting and 
pursuing in the woods was performed on horses. There was 
constant watching by night and frequent warding by day in the 
Hampshire towns, and guns and ammunition were carried to 
the meeting-houses every Sabbath.* 

The war taxes were heavy. The expenses of Massachusetts in 
1690, the year of the disastrous Quebec expedition, were more 
than 50,000 pounds, and occasioned the first issue of paper 
money. In 1689 and 1690, five single country rates in money, 
and thirty-five in produce, were ordered. In 1691, there was a 
tax of ;^24,ooo. In 1692, the nev/ charter went into operation, 
and Plymouth colony was united with Massachusetts. The first 
tax after this union, for 1692 and 1693, was ;^30,ooo in three 
parts. The taxes from 1692 to 1702, both inclusive, amounted to 
;^i 15,143. The proportion paid by the polls varied. In the 
eleven years, the polls averaged not far from one shilling each in 
2300 pounds of tax. — The taxes of ;^24,ooo and ;^30,ooo were 
collected with difficulty. In 1691, Springfield paid her share of 
20 country rates, laid in 1690, by sending 1214 bushels of grain 
to Boston, mostly peas.f 

Palisades. — The people of Hadley were building a palisade on 
the east side of the street, in January, 1690, and in February, 

♦Soldiers or militia in Hampshire — In May, 1690, Major Pynchon stated the number 
of soldiers belonging to the five old towns, at 454, viz., to Northampton, 128, Springfield, 
120, Hatfield, 80, Hadley, 66, Westfield, 60. Those of Springfield were in the town plat, 
60, on the west side of the river, 28, at Longmeadow, 20, at Skipmuck, 12. From other 
accounts, it may be conjectured that Suffield in 1690 had about 56 soldiers, Enfield, from 
25 to 30, Deerfield, not far from 44, and Brookfield, about 12; making in the county a few 
short of 600, and indicating a population of not less than 2500. 

Hadley had fewer soldiers than Hatfield in 1690, but perhaps not fewer inhabitants. 
Hadley returned 78 ratable polls in May, 1693, ^^^^^ ^ careful revision. If the old compu- 
tation of one poll to four inhabitants be correct, Hadley had in 1693 a population of 312. 

■j-In Hampshire, there was great complaint of the money taxes. In June, 1690, Spring- 
field complained louder than in 1685. The selectmen said in a petition — "our people have 
not patience to hear such a yoke, who know not such a thing as money." They hinted that 
some people thought it would be easier to pay taxes to Connecticut. In October, 1690, 
delegates from the Hampshire towns met, and sent a petition against money rates. They 
said — "not one in ten of the inhabitants of said county have any income of money in any 
manner." They begged "that it may be as of old, when those that had silver paid silver, 
and those that had it not, paid goats' hair, ram skins, &c." 

The Puritans knew what was in the Bible, and could readily refer to any passage. An- 
thony Austin, in a petition for the people of Suffield, in 1700, calls them, "your lame Me- 

Three province taxes of the Hampshire towns, ordered in 1692, 1696 and 1700, are sub- 
joined. Also a county tax for 1702. Some of the pence are omitted. The polls in 1700 
paid 3s. Brookfield was not taxed, and Deerfield, Suffield and Enfield were only partially 
taxed. Suffield and Enfield were suffering from the claims and violent acts of the people 
of Windsor. Hampshire was slow in paying the heavy taxes, and in June, 1694, owed 
£1853.3.1, and was ordered to pay in bills of credit or otherwise, except Suffield and Enfield. 
Suffield was abated £200. 


they voted to lay aside their private business and finish the forti- 
fication; and then to fortify some places within the town. They 
did not name any palisade on the west side. In March, 1691, 
they voted to repair the old garrison houses, and the east fortifi- 
cation, and to continue scouting in the woods. In June, 1693, 
they voted to have a daily scout, and to have two more houses 
fortified on the east side. George Stillman and others who lived 
near him at the north end, without the palisade, had liberty to 
fortify Stillman's house.* 

The grist-mills were preserved. The mill of Hadley, in a lonely 
place three miles north of the village, was not assailed, and the 
miller, Joseph Smith, was unharmed. 

Contributions. — Acts of kindness and beneficence were very 
frequent in New England during this war. Massachusetts con- 
tributed largely for the relief of the poor and distressed, and the 
redemption of the captives. There were captives not only in 
Canada, but some of our people were in captivity in Morocco 
and Algiers. — Connecticut made contributions for the east in 
1691, and she contributed much corn and some rye to the sufferers 
in Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Maine, in the spring and 
summer of 1697. 








County Tax. 




70. 4 





70. 4 



209. 9 



7- 4 


184. 7 


38. 6 

5. II 


112. 13 





104. 9 




103. 9 



3- 3 





1. 16 

£1404.18 £426 £276.19 £43i6 

Samuel Porter, the sheriff, stated to the Gen. Court in May, 1695, that he had seized 
on execution, the lands and estates of constables who had not paid their rates, but nobody 
would buy them for want of money, &c. 

A tax ordered in June, 1695, required single females, who earned a livelihood, to pay 2 
shillings each, being half as much as the poll tax of males. This was the only tax levied on 
females in this province. In 1692, East New Jersey taxed females over 16, one shilling each. 
♦Northampton, Hatfield and Deerfield built palisades in 1690, and some houses were 
fortified. The palisade of Northampton was the longest and most irregular. That of 
Hatfield, a few years later, was 229 rods on one side and 246 rods on the other, besides the 
ends; and the house of Mr. Williams was fortified, and three on the "Hill," and one at the 
"Farms." The line of the palisades could be traced in many houselots in Hatfield, 25 years 
ago. — A new fortification was made at Deerfield in 1693, by order of Major Pynchon, 302 
rods in length, (one account says 202 rods,) and the estimated cost was five shillings per rod, 
in money. Deerfield was allowed £40 for it in her province rates. The fortification was 
repaired in 1696 and 1702. — It may be inferred that well made palisades cost about five 
shillings per rod, as money. 




Execution of Sarah Smith and Negro Jack — Sickness of 1689 — Change of Government — 
New Charter, 1692 — Connecticut and Hampshire county — Third Indian War began in 
1703 — Destruction of Deerfield and Pascommuck, and other events in 1704 — Snow 
Shoes — The war from 1705 to 171 3 — Expenses — Taxes — Pay and food of soldiers — 
Captives — Scalps — Dogs — Dutch at Albany — Mohawks. 

Martin Smith of Deerfield was taken by the Indians in 1693, 
and returned from Canada in 1698. In his absence, his wife 
Sarah murdered her illegitimate child, at Deerfield, Jan. 11, 
1698. The judges of the Superior Court came up from Boston, 
escorted by 26 troopers, on account of the Indians, and she was 
tried at Springfield, Aug. 18, 1698. The jury brought in a verdict 
of guilty, and justice Winthrop sentenced her "to be hanged by 
the neck till she was dead," on the 25th of August, between 12 
and 4, P. M. Rev. John Williams of Deerfield preached a 
sermon at the execution. There was no newspaper to describe 
the scene. She was the first white person executed in Hampshire. 
She came from New Jersey to this county. 

Jack, a negro, who had been a servant of Mr. Samuel Wolcott 
of Wethersfield, was executed at Boston, in September, 168 1, 
for burning the house of Lieut. William Clark of Northampton, 
in the night of the 14th of July, 168 1. The house was on the lot 
on which Judge Dewey's dwelling-house now stands. In the 
indictment, jack was charged with setting the house on fire 
feloniously, "by taking a brand of fire from the hearth and 
swinging it up and down, to find victuals, as by his confession 
may appear." Jack only confessed carelessness, but the court 
and jury had evidence which led them to believe that he set the 
house on fire purposely. He was sentenced to be hung by the 
neck till dead, and "then to be taken down and burnt to ashes 
in the fire with Maria, negro."* 

Sickness of 1689.— This was a year of great sickness and mor- 
tality in Connecticut. For some weeks, they could not convene 

*The reason for burning the dead body does not appear. Perhaps it was done because 
he was a slave. Maria, a slave, had burnt the house of her master in Roxbury and another 
house. Mr. Savage says she was sentenced to be burnt to death. Barbarity and cruelty 
were often exhibited in punishing slaves, as they still are. One or two female slaves have 
been burnt at the stake in Massachusetts. On the 1 8th of September, 1755, Mark, a negro man, 
and Phillis, a negro woman, were executed at Cambridge, for poisoning their master, Capt. 
John Codman of Charlestown. He was hanged, and she was burnt at a stake about ten 
yards from the gallows. Phillis was burnt alive, a few miles from the capital of New England , 
by the sentence of Massachusetts judges, and according to the laws of England, which con- 
demned a male servant who killed his master to be hanged, and a female servant to be burnt 
alive. Such was the deference of English laws to English females. Many slaves were 
burnt alive in New York, New Jersey, and other colonies. 


a General Court, and could not raise soldiers; and they were not 
able to gather all their crops. The sickness extended up into 
Hampshire county as far as Springfield, where it was noticed by 
Major Pynchon and the selectmen. The latter said they lost 
much of their English and Indian harvest and hay, by reason of 
the sickness. If the disease was in the towns above the Falls, it 
was less severe and general. 1683 was a sickly year in Connecti- 
cut and at Springfield. 

Change of Government. 
Under the government of Dudley some months, and of Andros 
above two years, the people were deprived of power and had no 
voice in the government. From May, 1686 to May, i68g, there 
were no representatives of the people. After the overthrow of 
Andros, Randolph, Dudley and their associates, the Council of 
Safety at Boston, early in May, 1689, wrote to the towns in Hamp- 
shire, requesting each to choose a representative to aid in the 
establishment of government. Seven towns in the county made 
returns between May 9 and May 17. That of Hadley follows: 

"Hadley, May 15, 1689. This day, the inhabitants of Hadley, (so many of them as 
could conveniently assemble,) chose Capt. Aaron Cooke, their representative, to join with 
the representatives of the other towns of the Massachusetts, at Boston, on the 22d of this 
instant May, impowering him to act with them for the common safety according to the need 
of our present state, and to any emergency, till there be a more orderly settlement of gov- 
ernment. Then also voted that the Governor, Deputy Governor and Assistants, chosen 
and sworn in May, 1686, according to charter rights, and the deputies then sent by the free- 
men, be the government now settled in the aforesaid colony. At the same time, gave in their 
votes for the adding of five to the aforesaid Assistants, which votes are sent by their repre- 
sentative, Capt. Aaron Cooke. As attest, 

SAMUEL MOODY, \ Selectmen for 

GEORGE STILLMAN, J the town." 

Representatives from six Hampshire towns appeared at Boston, 
May 22. A government according to the forms under the old 
charter continued about three years, though the charter had been 
abrogated. They made no permanent laws, but provided for the 
war, &c. The first General Court under the new charter met 
June 8, 1692, and began to legislate for the "Province of Massa- 
chusetts Bay," which embraced Plymouth colony and Maine.* 

Connecticut and Hampshire county. — Connecticut, having no 
enemies from Canada to encounter within her own borders, was 

*By the new charter, the governor and some other officers were appointed by the king. 
The royal governor could negative any of the 28 councilors who were chosen by the repre- 
sentatives and council jointly, and he appointed all judges and other officers of the law, 
with consent of the council. It was the intention of the king and his advisers to form a 
royal party, a party favorable to England, and they partially succeeded. 


to furnish occasional aid to Massachusetts and New York. As 
she did not comply with all their requests, complaints were made 
to the government in England, especially by the governor of 
New York, To counteract these, particular accounts of what 
Connecticut had done were sent to England, and the following 
letter of acknowledgment was obtained from Hampshire.* 

The ready assistance this county of Hampshire, in their majesties' province of the 
Massachusetts Bay, in New England, have had and found in our distresses in the times of 
war, from our neighbors and friends of Connecticut colony, calls for our grateful acknowl- 
edgment, as we do expect the continuance of their former friendliness and good neighbor- 

Wherefore, these are humbly to signify, that we have received great help and good assist- 
ance from the government of their majesties' colony of Connecticut, in a ready, large and 
plentiful supply of men and help, both in the first war in the years 1675 ^^^ ^^1^> 3s also at 
divers times upon emergencies and exigences, they have performed great helpfulness in 
going upon discoveries and keeping garrisons, to their great charge, and now lately in their 
assistance at Deerlield, our chief frontier town; whereby through God's goodness, they have 
been a great support and guard, encouragement and safety to our county, and discourage- 
ment to the common enemy; and hereunto we subscribe our hands, September 28th, 1693. 

Justices of the Peace 
for West Hampshire, 
in the province of 
the Massachusetts Bay, 
in N. E. 
Hatfield. / Thomas Colton, Capt. of Springfield. 

Edward Taylor, Minister ofl Samuel Roote, Lieut, of Westfield. 

Solomon Stoddard, Minister ofl John Pynchon, 

Northampton. J Peter Tilton, 

John Williams, Minister ofl Aaron Cook, 

Deerfield. J Joseph Hawley, 

William Williams, Minister ofl Samuel Partrigg, 

Westfield. j Timothy Nash, Lieut, of Hadley. 

[Springfield and Hadley were desti- Samuel Partrigg, Capt. of Hatfield. 

tute of a settled minister, in 1693.] John King, Lieut, of Northampton. 

Andros was aided in his despotic and tyrannical government by a few degenerate sons of 
New England, and some others approved even in Connecticut. King William was no 
friend to popular liberty, and he appointed to office Andros and those associated with his 
tyranny, and Joseph Dudley became governor of Massachusetts in 1702. The people at 
first had no confidence in him, but he sought and gained the good will of many influential 
men among the clergy and people, including a number in these river towns, of whom one 
minister was a relative. A large party in the province were strongly opposed to him. — Lord 
Bellamont, who preceded Dudley, was a very popular governor. 

James II. directed Andros to encourage Episcopacy, and the first Episcopal church in 
Massachusetts began under him. 

England had much more influence under the new charter than under the old. Our 
governors lauded the English sovereigns on whom they depended, and sought to gratify 
their wishes; and the governors were praised and seconded by their dependents and those 
who looked to them for favor. These men and others celebrated birth, accession and coro- 
nation days of kings and queens, and some other royal events, at the public expense, in the 
council chamber, by drinking wine and illuminating. These fooleries did not extend into the 

Such patriots as these are very common in the United States at the present day. 

♦Trumbull mentions letters of thanks from Hampshire under 1705, when Gov. Dudley 
of Massachusetts and Gov. Dongan of New York were attempting to injure Connecticut 
and abridge her rights. Connecticut has records of soldiers sent to the aid of Hampshire 


"The Honorable Colonel John Pynchon, Esq. was sick and 
died January 17, 1702-3, in the 77th year of his age," says the 
Springfield record. Lieut. Col. Samuel Partrigg, or Partridge, 
of Hatfield, succeeded him, as the most influential and powerful 
man in the county, in civil and military affairs. 

Third Indian War, 1703 to 17 13. 

In May, 1702, war was again commenced between England 
and France, which extended to their colonies in 1703. Hamp- 
shire had the same nine towns as in the last war. There was an 
alarm in August, 1703, and aid being requested of Connecticut, 
two companies came up to Deerfield; one remained 6 days and 
the other 39 days. On the 8th of October, Zebadiah Williams 
and John Nims were taken in Deerfield meadow and carried to 
Canada. Those who lived without the palisade removed within.* 

Accounts of the destructive and memorable assault of the 
French and Indians upon Deerfield, on the 29th of February, 
1704, have often been published. It appears by a comparison 
of Hatfield records and Deerfield narratives, that the number of 
persons killed and taken was 162, including three Frenchmen 
taken, who resided in Deerfield; that 38f were slain in the pali- 
saded village, and nine in the meadow fight; and that 112 of the 
English were taken, of whom 2 soon escaped, 22 were slain or 
perished on the way to Canada, 28 remained in Canada, and 60 
returned. Eight or nine of the slain and as many of the captives 
belonged to other towns. 

Some papers in the state archives, relating to the movements 
of men from the towns below, and to the fight in Deerfield 
meadow, have not been published. The following petition, 
signed by Capt. Jonathan Wells of Deerfield, and Sergt. Ebenezer 
Wright of Northampton, in behalf of the company, was presented 
to the General Court, May, 1704. 

"We [of the towns below] understanding the extremity of the poor people at Deerfield, 
made all possible haste to their relief, that we might deliver the remnant and do despoil on 

*A letter from Rev. John Williams to Gov. Dudley, in October, 1703, a few months be- 
fore the fatal attack, says; — "The fortification can be mended no longer; we must make it 
all new, and fetch the timber for 206 rods, 3 or 4 miles, if we get oak. We have been driven 
from our houses into the fort, and there are only 10 homelots in it, and we have been 
so crowded together that indoor affairs are carried on with difEculty. Strangers tell us that 
they would not live where we do, for twenty times as much as we get." 

A letter from S. Partridge, in October, 1703, says Northampton, Hadley, Hatfield and 
Westfield had all laid out much in forting. — Hatfield voted in 1703 and 1704 to fortify three 
houses on the Hill and six in the town; to rebuild the palisade, and to build stairs into the 
turret of the meeting-house, so that a ward or day-watchman might be placed in theturret. 
The other towns may have done as much. 

•j-The Hatfield account makes the number slain in the fort, 41, and on the way to Canada, 
19. Two or three of the former belong to the latter. 



the enemy.* Being joined by a number of the inhabitants and garrison soldiers, we forced 
tlie enemy out of the town, leaving a part of their plunder behind them; and pursuing them 
about a mile and a half, did great execution upon them; we saw at the time many dead 
bodies, and we and others did afterwards see prints on the snow where dead bodies were 
drawn to a hole in the river. The enemy being reinforced by a great number of fresh men, 
we were overpowered and necessitated to run to the fort, and in our flight, nine of the com- 
pany were slain, and some others wounded, and some of us lost our upper garments, which 
we had just before put off in the pursuit." The action was over before others came into the 
fort. They asked the General Court for some recompense. 

Ebenezer Wright gave the names of 57 men who fought in 
Deerfield meadow. Of these, 13 belonged to Deerfield, 8 to 
Northampton, 14 to Hadley and 22 to Hatfield. Of those whose 
dwellings were in the three towns below, 6 were of the Deerfield 
garrison, and 38 went up on the morning of the 29th. The nine 
slain were Joseph Catlin and David Hoyt, Jr. of Deerfield; 
Samuel Foot, Samuel AUis and Sergt. Benjamin Wait of Hatfield; 
and Sergeant Samuel Boltwood, his son Robert Boltwood, Jona- 
than Ingram and Nathaniel Warner, Jr. of Hadley. John 
Smead of Deerfield was shot in the thigh, and carried the ball 
until his death in 1720. 

The 14 men in the fight, who belonged to Hadley, were the four 
just named, that were slain, and Samuel Boltwood, Jr., Samuel 
Church, wounded in the arm, Benjamin Church, wounded in the 
foot, John Montague, Jr., Ebenezer Selden, Nathaniel White, Jr., 
Thomas Hovey, Joseph Smith, Jr., Samuel Crowfoot, John Marsh. 
Samuel Boltwood was a sergeant of the Deerfield garrison; the 
others went up on the morning of the 29th. Thomas Selden 
of Hadley was among those slain in the town, and was probably 
one of the garrison. Hadley had five men slain in one day. 
Joseph Eastman of Hadley was one of the captives. 

The General Court, June 9, 1704, ordered that the losses of 
the soldiers, amounting to ;^34. 17.0, should be made up; that 
each of the four widows of soldiers slain should have 5 pounds; 
and that though only one scalp was obtained, the survivors of the 
57 should have ;{^6o equally divided, and the plunder taken from 
the enemy, which amounted to ;{^, and consisted of guns, 
blankets, hatchets, &c. The articles which the soldiers lost were 
coats, jackets, hats, &c.f 

*A petition of some of the survivors in 1735, stated that "the light of the burning build- 
ings at Deerfield, gave notice to the towns below, sometime before we had news from the 
distressed people." — John Stoddard of Northampton was at the house of Mr. Williams in 
Deerfield, and he leaped from a chamber window and ran to Hatfield with the news. 

•j-In January, 1705, payment was requested for losses in the "Deerfield Fight," meaning 
the fight in the village, for nine men. One of them was Sergt. Samuel Boltwood, several 
were from Northampton, and some were taken. Two Hatfield men requested a reward for 
killing an Indian in the same fight. These may all have belonged to the garrison. The 
petition was not granted at that time. 


Deerfield was soon filled with soldiers from the towns in 
Hampshire and from Connecticut. A post was sent to Hartford, 
and 147 men came up from that colony on the first of March, 
who remained at Deerfield only 4 or 5 days. They could not 
pursue the enemy for want of snow shoes, the snow being deep. 
The French and Indians had snow shoes. Capt. Newberry 
came up in March with 62 men and remained until September. 

The Deerfield people who remained, were about to desert the 
town, and seek safety elsewhere. To prevent this, Lt. Col. Par- 
tridge of Hatfield, on the second of March, impressed the men 
into the service, and posted them at Deerfield as garrison soldiers. 
Pay and subsistence were allowed to them for fifteen months 
and perhaps longer.* 

On the 13th of May, 1704, a party of Indians attacked a ham- 
let of five families, at Pascommuck, near the north-east end of 
Mount Tom in Northampton, and killed or captured not less 
than 33 persons. Of these, 19 were slain, viz., Samuel Janes, 
his wife and three children, four children of Benjamin Janes, 
Benoni Jones and two children, John Searl and three children, 
Moses Hutchinson and one child and Patience Webb; and three 
escaped, eight were rescued, and three were carried to Canada.")" — 
Capt. John Taylor of Northampton, who pursued the Indians 
with a company of horsemen, was slain. — A post was sent to 
Hartford, and the next day. Major Wm. Whiting came up with 
192 dragoons; they pursued the Indians at first on horseback, 
and next on foot, on account of mountains and swamps, but did 
not overtake them. 

Before the middle of June, there was a credible report that 
an army of French and Indians had marched from Canada, to 
attack Northampton, or some other Hampshire town. Major 
William Whiting came up at the head of 343 men in 5 companies, 

*There may have been about 25 men remaining, and 50 or 60 women and children. 
Samuel Partridge, in Oct. 1704, estimated that "half who were to pay the Deerfield tax in 
May last, were killed or captured." The other half of the taxable persons seem to have 
been left. Some houses within and without the palisade were not burnt. 

■j-Three were found alive, knocked on the head, and one of them scalped. They all re- 
covered. The wife of Benjamin Janes, who was scalped, was under the care of Dr. Gershom 
Bulkley and others, at Wethersfield, several years. Her husband lived in Wethersfield with 
her, and the governor and council kindly gave him a brief, May 8, 1707, craving the charity 
of the people of Branford, Guilford, Killingworth and Saybrook. She was finally cured 
and they settled in Coventry. — Those carried to Canada were Elisha Searl, son of John, 
aged 9 years, Esther, wife of Benoni Jones, (an Ingersol,) who died in Canada, and her 
niece, Margaret Huggins, aged 18, who returned. Elisha Searl came to Northampton in 
1722, and was reluctantly induced to remain, the government aiding. He, like some other 
New England children, had been strongly attached to the Catholic religion and to the Indian 
mode of life. 


from every county and almost every town, in Connecticut, and 
they remained many wrecks. His head-quarters were at North- 
ampton, There was intelligence of the approach of the enemy 
three times in June and July, and other troops came up each 
time, and remained a few days. The French and Indians, finding 
these towns prepared, went eastward and fell upon Lancaster. 
The county was more full of troops in 1704, than it had been 
since 1676. Many of the county soldiers were in arms. There 
was frequent marching and constant scouting. Several persons 
were slain in the county. May 11, John Allen and wife were 
slain at Deerfield. July 19, Thomas Russell of Hatfield, was 
slain above Deerfield, and a friendly Indian near Hatfield mill. 
July 29, Thomas Battis of Brookfield coming to Hadley as a post, 
was killed in the present Belchertown. July 31, Capt. Allen of 
Connecticut lost two men, Benton and Olmstead, between North- 
ampton and Westfield, and killed two Indians. — John Hawks of 
Deerfield wounded. 1704 was an expensive and calamitous year. 

On the 5th of June, 1704, Caleb Lyman of Northampton, with 
five Connecticut Indians, left Northampton to go up and attack 
some Indians who had established themselves at Cowas of Cowas- 
set.* In nine days, they came near an Indian wigwam in the 
evening, in which were nine Indians. They rushed upon them 
and killed six men and one squaw, and two escaped. They 
returned to Northampton on the 19th or 20th of June, with six 
scalps and some plunder. The General Court gave Caleb Lyman 
£21, and the five Indians ;^io, each. 

Snow Shoes. — It was not until the enemy made attacks in the 
winter, and could not be pursued, that snow shoes were deemed 
of importance. The Massachusetts General Court, March 13, 
1704, ordered 500 pairs of snow shoes and as many moccasons, 
for the frontiers, one-fourth of them for Hampshire. The snow 
shoes or rackets were not used with common shoes, but with 
Indian shoes or moccasons. The province allowed only five 
shillings for a pair of each, for some years, though men in Hamp- 
shire and elsewhere affirmed that good ones cost ten shillings 
in money. The price was raised to seven shillings in 1712, and 
in April, 17 12, Col. Partridge sent the names of 463 soldiers in 
Hampshire, who had provided themselves with snow shoes and 
"mogginsons," and each was allowed seven shillings. f 

*This Cowas, or region of white pines, was, in later times, a part of the Lower Coos, now 
in Newbury, Vermont. Tlie wigwam was supposed to be 20 miles below Cowas. 

■j-These Indian inventions for traveling on deep snows, were noticed by Champlain ir 
Canada in 1603. Josselyn found them among the Indians of Maine. A few Englisu 
hunters and soldiers in Massachusetts used them in the 17th century. 


But little damage was done by Indians in Hampshire in 1705. 
A winter attack upon some of these towns was expected, and 
200 men from Connecticut with snow shoes were posted at West- 
field, Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield, in January, February 
and part of March. Garrisons were kept also at Deerfield and 
Brookfield. There were in the year several reports of the approach 
of Indians, and many men were in the public service. — In 1706, 
Samuel Chapin of Springfield was wounded, July 31; widow 
Mary Tosh, or Mackintosh, was killed at Brookfield; and Judah 
Trumbull of Suffield was slain in July. A company from Con- 
necticut was in garrison three months or more. — In July, 1707, 
Edward Bancroft of Westfield, aged 19, was mortally wounded, 
and died Sept. 10. No other harm from Indians in this county 
in 1707, is recorded. An unsuccessful expedition against Port 
Royal cost Massachusetts above ;;(^i 6,000. 

In 1708, several lives were lost in Hampshire. July 9, Samuel 
and Joseph Parsons, sons of Capt. John Parsons of Northampton, 
were slain in the woods. July 26, seven or eight Indians rushed 
into the house of Lt. Abel Wright of Skipmuck in Springfield, 
and killed two soldiers, Aaron Parsons of Northampton and 
Benajah Hulbert of Enfield; scalped the wife of Lt. Wright, who 
died Oct. 19; took Hannah, the wife of Lieut. Wright's son Henry, 
and probably slew her; killed her infant son Henry in a cradle, 
and knocked on the head her daughter Hannah, aged 2 years, 
in the same cradle; the latter recovered. In August, a son of 
Josiah Barber of Windsor was slain and Martin Kellogg, Jr. taken 
"100 miles up the river." Oct. 13, Abijah Bartlett was slain at 
Brookfield, John Wolcott taken and three Brookfield men 
wounded. Oct. 26, Ebenezer Field, son of John Field of Hatfield, 
was slain at Muddy Brook in Deerfield. Some Connecticut 
soldiers were in Hampshire in 1707 and 1708. 

Excursions to Lake Champlain and Cowasset. — Capt. John 
Stoddard of Northampton, with 12 men, crossed what is now 
Vermont, in May, 1707. They killed no Indians. It is supposed 
that this was the first party of soldiers that went from Connecticut 
River to the lake. — In February, 1708, Capt. Benjamin Wright 
of Northampton, with a company, ascended the river to Coasset 
or Cowasset, (now Newbury, Vt.) They found no Indians. 
Soldiers extended their excursions much farther than in the last 
war. — In 1709, Capt. B. Wright, with about 10 men, crossed the 
wilderness to Lake Champlain. On the 20th of May, they killed 
one Indian and wounded others near the lake. On their return 
they had a skirmish with a party of Indians on Onion River, and 


Lt. John Wells of Deerfield was slain, John Burt of Northampton 
was slain or perished in the woods, and John Strong of North- 
ampton was wounded. The General Court gave to Capt. Wright 
;^I2 and to nine men £b each. They had a pocket compass to 
guide them. 

In 1709, the English government directed the northern colonies 
to raise forces, to unite with those of England, and attack Canada 
by sea and land, but the promised fleet and troops from England 
did not arrive, and the enterprise failed. Massachusetts had 
900 men in arms near Boston, and many vessels employed, from 
May to October, and the expense to the province was above 
20,000 pounds. 

April II, 1709, Mehuman Hinsdale of Deerfield, was captured 
in the road above Hatfield.* June 23, Joseph Clesson and John 
Arms were taken near Deerfield, and the next day, Jonathan 
Williams was killed, Matthew Clesson mortally wounded, and 
two others wounded. Aug. 8, John Clary and Robert Granger 
were slain at Brookfield. 

July 22, 1710, six men, who were making hay at Brookfield, 
were surprised and slain. A great loss for that small place. There 
is no account of any attack near Connecticut River in 17 10. Pen- 
hallow's History states that a post was slain between Brookfield 
and Hadley in 17 10. The Indians did mischief at Waterbury, 
Conn. The capture of Port Royal in 17 10, cost Massachusetts 
about 20,000 pounds. 

Aug. 10, 171 1, Samuel Strong of Northampton was taken, and 
his son Samuel slain, as they were going into the south meadow 
gate. The father was carried to Canada, but returned. f 

In 171 1, an expedition fitted out by England and the northern 
colonies, against Quebec, was a failure. This was the third 
attempt to conquer Canada. The expense to Massachusetts was 
near 21,000 pounds. Soldiers had not before been drawn from 
Hampshire for distant expeditions, but one of the 18 companies 
of Massachusetts that embarked at Boston in July, was from 
this county, and commanded by Capt. Ebenezer Pomeroy of 
Northampton. He must have had men from all the towns in 
Hampshire, except one or two. Their pay from June 23 to Oct. 
26, 171 1, amounted to ;^ Their names are not found. 

*He thought he was in no danger because the leaves were not out. The Indians seldom 
appeared in the spring till they could be hidden by the leaves. 

•j-He was the grandfather of Nehemiah Strong, professor in Yale College, and Judge 
Simeon Strong of Amherst, 


On the 9th of January, 1 712, the lake and rivers being frozen 
hard and the snow deep, Col. Partridge levied 100 men from his 
regiment to strengthen Deerfield and other exposed places. The 
men had snow^ shoes, and made some excursions on them. 

In April, 17 12, Lieut. Thomas Baker of Northampton, vi^ith 
32 men, passed up the Connecticut, and crossed it south of 
Cowasset, and proceeded to the Pemigewasset, w^here they found 
a party of Indians, and killed one, and mortally v^^ounded others 
as they believed. They took as many beaver skins as they could 
carry, and went down near the Merrimac to Dunstable, and thence 
to Boston. The General Court gave them 30 pounds besides their 

July 29, 1712, Benjamin Wright, aged 18, of Skipmuck in 
Springfield, was taken, and afterwards killed, July 30, a scouting 
from Connecticut, was attacked west of Deerfield, and Samuel 
Andrus of Hartford slain, and two taken. 

The queen's proclamation for a suspension of arms, was pub- 
lished in Boston, Oct. 27, 1712. The peace of Utrecht was signed 
March 30, 1713. 

This second ten years war, called Queen Anne's war, was much 
more expensive than King William's war. The expenditures of 
Massachusetts, civil and military, from May, 1703 to May, 1713, 
amounted to 370,000* pounds. Of this sum, at least 285,000 
pounds, or 950,000 dollars, were for war. The war was exces- 
sively burdensome to Massachusetts. In 10 years, taxes were 
laid upon the people to the amount of 227,000 pounds, or about 
75,000 dollars yearly. The polls were taxed 10 shillings yearly. 
The impost and excise in ten years produced about 35,000 pounds. 
Province bills were issued every year, and in May, 17 13, the 
amount of unredeemed bills was 127,000 pounds, and the debt of 
the province was not much short of that sum.f 

*The expenses for nine years are obtained from the accounts of treasurers, in the Massa- 
chusetts Archives. One year's expense is estimated. 

•j-The military expenses in Hampshire county in this war were between 2500 and 3000 
pounds in a year, including the subsistence of Connecticut troops. The pay of these troops 
cost Connecticut large sums. 

The pay of soldiers in this war was generally six shillings per week; for a time, those in 
garrisotis received only five shillings; in the Canada expedition, 171 1, they had eight shillings. 
Their food was from three shillings to four shillings and eight pence per week. In 1704, the 
allowance to a man per day, in a fort or garrison, was one pound of bread, two-thirds of a 
pound of pork or sometimes one pound and a third of beef, half a pint of peas, and two 
quarts of beer. The Connecticut allowance was nearly the same. Marching soldiers had 
a little more food. The ration of provisions down to the Revolution did not differ much 
from that of 1704. 

The first regular allowance of rum to soldiers, that I have noticed, was one gill per day, 
instead of beer, in the Port Royal expedition in 1707. Connecticut allowed the tame, in a 



Many of the Hampshire soldiers were employed in scouting 
and garrisoning. Capt. John Stoddard of Northampton, com- 
manded a large number of soldiers many years, who were in 
several towns, and moved to places that were threatened, and 
ranged the woods. 

The Hampshire province tax in 1708 was ;^I046, los., and 
it was the same for several years, thus proportioned: — Spring- 
field, £^']^, Northampton, 220.10, Hadley, 157.10, Hatfield, 
136.10, Westfield, 100, Suffield, 70, Enfield, 60, Deerfield, 30, 
Brookfield, o. 

During this war, 103 persons were slain in this county, or in 
excursions from it, viz., 47 at Deerfield in one day, 20 at or near 
Pascommuck,and 36 in various places. 123 were taken, of whom 22 
were slain or died on the way to Canada, and two died in Canada.* 

There were 187 captives in Canada from New England, early 
in 1706, after a number had returned, and many were captured 
after 1706. Messengers were sent from Hampshire county to 
Canada by way of Albany, five times to redeem captives, and 
from Boston to Quebec by water twice, from 1705 to 17 13. In 
1706, John Sheldon of Deerfield, brought to Boston 44 captives 
and Capt. Appleton, 57; among the latter was Rev. John Williams 
of Deerfield. Many came at other times. Much of the difiiculty 
in recovering captives was owing to the Catholic priests who were 
more inhuman than the French governors and people. The 
captives who remained in Canada were lost to their friends. They 
were ignorant Catholics, and many differed little from the savages. f 

In this war, Massachusetts gave a reward of ;^io for Indian 
scalps, obtained by those who received wages and subsistence, 

land expedition to Canada, in 171 1. Soldiers on the frontiers were not furnished with rum. 

This war, like all others, promoted idleness and vice, and had a pernicious influence on 
many of the people. 

*To those who had been in Canada, may be added William Boltwood, son of Sergeant 
Samuel Boltwood of Hadley. He died below Quebec, Aug. 27, 1714, on his return. He 
had been a captive, or perhaps an aid in recovering captives. 

Three men taken at Deerfield were sent to France and came home by way of England. 
They saw a part of both countries. 

•j-Several unsuccessful attempts were made to redeem Eunice Williams, daughter of Rev. 
John Williams of Deerfield. May 26, 1713, John Schuyler of Albany, visited her among 
the Cagnawagas or French Mohawks in Canada, with a priest and an Indian interpreter. 
She had recently been married to an Indian who was present. Neither Mr. Schuyler nor 
the priest nor the interpreter could persuade her to talk with Mr. S. or answer his questions. 
The only words she uttered in almost two hours were jaghte oghte, which meant a denial. 
She was a besotted. Catholic Indian. [Mr. Schuyler's letter is in the Massachusetts Ar- 

Rev. Eleazar Williams, whom all believed to be a descendant of Eunice Williams, until 
recently some have supposed him to be the Dauphin, or son of Louis XVI., died at Hogans- 
burg, Franklin Co., N. Y., Aug. 28, 1858. 


and in some cases, i^20. Volunteers who went out at their own 
expense, received ;^ioo for a scalp, after March, 1704. Not 
many Indians were destroyed. Penhallow said thechargeof thewar 
was so great, that every Indian killed or taken cost 1000 pounds. 

Dogs. — In November, 1706, Massachusetts passed an act "for 
raising and increasing dogs, for the better security of the frontiers." 
In 1708, the sum of 41 pounds was paid for "trailing of dogs" 
on the frontiers of Middlesex. Dogs were employed on the west- 
ern frontier in 1746, and Gideon Lyman of Northampton, was 
allowed ;^I2, 13s. yd. for purchasing dogs. — Connecticut, in 
October, 1708, appropriated 50 pounds to bring up and main- 
tain dogs to hunt after Indians. New Jersey, in 1758, proposed 
to procure 50 "large, strong and fierce dogs," for the service. 
It is not known that any Indian was harmed by the dogs. Per- 
haps the main object was to trace the Indians to their hiding 
places. (See page 167.) 

The Dutch at Albany. — The Five Nations made a treaty of 
neutrality with the French, which enabled the latter and their 
Indian allies to direct all their efforts against New England. 
Grahame's History of the United States affirms that the Dutch 
merchants at Albany purchased in the most open manner of the 
Canadian Indians the plunder they had taken from the people of 
New England, thus encouraging them in their depredations. 
Some respectable citizens of Albany detested this base policy, 
especially Col. Schuyler. Kalm, in his Travels in North America, 
in 1749, relates similar things of the Dutch at Albany. 

The Mohaw^ks or Maquas. — Massachusetts made presents to 
the Mohawks in 1704 and 1708; and entertained some of them 
in Boston, and gave gifts to them in 1709. The four Mohawk 
sachems, who sailed for England with Col. Peter Schuyler, in 
February, 1710, were supported in Boston and the vicinity about 
five weeks, in the usual style. (See pages 124, 125.) They went 
out to Dunstable to hunt several times, and Josiah Parker ac- 
companied them, and furnished them with horses, rum, tobacco, 
&c. The General Court voted £^0 for Col. Schuyler and these 
chiefs on the voyage. They attracted the attention of the English, 
were feasted by the nobility and had an audience with the queen. 
They returned to Boston in July, 17 10, and Gov. Dudley furnished 
Col. Schuyler and the sachems with 9 horses for themselves, and 
a guard of 10 troopers to Westfield. 

The objects of this embassy were to impress the Indians with 
an idea of the power and greatness of England, and to solicit the 
aid of a British force to conquer Canada. 



Common lands — Division of Hadley lands now in Amherst — Division of Hadley lands now 
in South Hadley and Granby — The Crank — Highways and Paths — Division of the In- 
ner Commons in Hadley — Summary of Grants and Distributions — Hockanum — Peter 

The division of the common uplands, or outer and inner com- 
mons, was a most important and exciting subject, in a great 
number of New England towns, for a long time. It was a ques- 
tion of property, in which men are always interested. The more 
wealthy inhabitants desired a distribution of the commons ac- 
cording to the estates or valuations of men; those of small estates 
contended for a more equal division, having more regard to 
persons. Men of middling estates were seldom united, and many 
of them acted in concert with the first class. In these river 
towns, the subject of dividing the commons was not much dis- 
cussed until the latter part of the 17th century; the agitation 
continued at times for half a century or more.* 

Division of Amherst Lands. 

Hadley ordered no general division of a tract of upland until 
1700. On the fourth of March, 1700, the town voted that all the 
land from Mount Holyoke to Mill River, west of a line three and 
a quarter miles from the meeting-house, should lie as common 
land forever, "supposing (they say,) that this line will take in the 
whole of the New Swamp," that is, leave the whole west of it. 
And they voted that the commons east of that line, should be 
laid out in three divisions, between the Brookfield road and Mill 
River; leaving forty rods between the divisions for highways, and 
what was necessary for east and west highways.f Every one 
was to have a proportion in the first or second division, and every 

*Rev. Jonathan Edwards, in a letter written in 1751, said there had been in Northamp- 
ton for 40 or 50 years, two parties, "somewhat like the court and country party of England, 
if I may compare small things with great." The first party embraced the great proprietors 
of land, and the parties contended about land and other matters. There were similar parties 
in other towns. 

■fit is supposed that the highways were left 40 rods wide, to enable the future inhabitants 
to deviate many rods from a straight course, on the public land, in forming the ways for 
travel, and thus avoid swamps, steep ascents, and other bad places. In 1754, Hadley re- 
duced the western highway to 20 rods in width, and the eastern to 12 rods, most of the way. 
They also reduced the width of the cross highways. In 1788, Amherst narrowed the high- 
ways to 6 rods, and some to 4 rods in width, and sold the land thus gained to the owners of 
adjoining lots. 


one in the third division. Every householder to have a 50 pound 
allotment, and parents or masters to have a 25 pound allotment 
for each male minor above 16. The town voted, March 3, 1 701, 
that the rest of these commons should be laid out according to 
the meadow land each man possessed. In drawing, the first lot, 
or No. I, was to be next to the Brookfield road, in each division, 
and the numbers were to proceed northward. They then drew 
lots.* Wood and timber might be cut on the lots as long as 
they were unfenced. The town measurers, Capt. Aaron Cooke, 
^ Cornet Nehemiah Dickinson and Mr. Samuel Porter, were not 
ordered by the town to lay out the east commons until March i, 
I703,and they reported on the 3d ofMay ensuing, thatthey had laid 
out thethree divisions. Theywerenotaidedbyasurveyor'scompass. 
The number of persons who drew in the first and second, or 
west and middle divisions, were 97, or 60 in the first and 37 in 
the second. Of these, 16 were Hatfield men, who owned land 
in Hadley meadows, chiefly on the west side of the river, and three 
more were non-residents, leaving 78 lots for the inhabitants of 
Hadley.f Apparently, the head of a family drew 17J rods in 
width, or 26^ acres, for himself, and half as much for each son 
between 16 and 21 years of age. Men over 21, and not house- 
holders, seem to have had no more than minors. The rest was 
drawn for meadow land— more than half of the whole. These 
two divisions were 240 rods wide each, and the lots were 240 rods 
long. The first division extended from Brookfield road to Mill 
River, and according to the measurers, the distance was 1 96 1 
rods, or the width of 60 lots 1841 rods, and of three highways 120 
rods. The land in the 60 lots was 2760 acres. — The second divi- 
sion extended north from the Brookfield road 1674 rods, or the 
width of 37 lots was 1562 rods, and of 3 highways, 122 rods. 
Land in the 37 lots, 2343 acres. This division stopped far short 
of Mill River. 

"Here foUoweth an account of the wood lots laid out in April, 1703, the first lot beginning 
at Brookfield road, and each lot in the first and second divisions to run 240 rods in length, 
due east of the stakes and marks at each corner," of the west end. The breadth and acres 

*In a division south of Mount Holyoke, lots were drawn in this manner. As many 
papers as there were proprietors, were numbered and put into a box and well shaken. Each 
proprietor drew out one of these papers, or if any were absent, the moderator drew for them. 

■j-The number of families in Hadley in 1701, may have been 70, and they all lived on the 
old broad street, and the highway at the north end, except perhaps the miller. 78 persons 
in Hadley drew two lots each in the Amherst lands, and many of the lots were extensive 
enough for farms, and much of the soil was good. 

The laying out in 1703, was according to polls and meadow land in 1701, and to the 
drawing of 1701. In the following list of names, those of Hatfield men have this mark,*, 
and of other non-residents, this mark, -j". Samuel Crowfoot was casually omitted, and had 



are given in the records. Only the breadth is given here. Every rod in breadth makes 
one acre and a half. 

51 Preserved Smith, 17 8 
Highway 40 rods N. end of Wells's Hill. 

52 Samuel Gaylord, 25 5 

53 William Gaylord, 17 5 

54 Wid. Hannah Porter, 25 10 

55 Samuel Porter, 151 8 

56 Hezekiah Porter, 31 6 

57 John Porter, 13 6 

58 Experience Porter, 32 3 

59 Ichabod Porter, 23 6 

60 Peter Montague, 89 o 
Mill River, North. 
Second Division. 

Brookfield Road. 

1 John Goodman, 67 I 

2 Aaron Cook, Esq., 39 7 
.3 Thomas Hovey, 48 9 

4 Westwood Cook, 73 9 

5 Samuel Cook, 44 I 
Highway 40 rods — removed 1734. 

6 Moses Cook, 44 15 

7 Samuel Boltwood, 62 i 

8 Daniel Marsh, 134 3 

9 fThos. Dickinson, 44 15 

10 Deac. Samuel Smith, 45 10 

1 1 John Montague, 54 o 

12 Isaac Warner, 17 8 

13 Daniel Warner, 8 13 

14 Widow Cooke, 2 15 

15 Ens. Chileab Smith, 39 10 

16 Samuel Smith, son of Ch. 34 2 

17 Luke Smith, " 55 7 

18 Ebenezer Smith, " 21 15 

19 John Smith, " 26 o 

20 Mr. Isaac Chauncey, 52 9 
2! Town Lot, 60 acres, 40 o 

22 George Stillman, 55 7 

23 Ichabod Smith, 38 o 

24 Jacob Warner, 44 i 
Highway 40 rods, "runs down to 
Foot's Folly from New Swamp." 

25 Land of Coleman, 39 6 

26 John Kellogg, 32 8 

27 Edward Kellogg, 17 8 

28 Lt. Joseph Kellogg, 55 6 

29 Nathaniel Kellogg, 17 8 

30 -j-Mr. Samuel Russell, 4 3 

31 •j'Mr. Jonathan Russell, 7 6 

32 John Nash, 31 6 

33 Joseph Nash, 31 o 

34 *Thomas Nash, 8 13 
Highway 32 rods in breadth. 

35 Neh'h Dickinson & sons, 113 13 

36 Timothy Eastman, 69 5 

37 Peter Tilton, 59^ acres, 39 6 
Commons, North. 

First Division. 

Brookfield road. 

Rods. feet. 

I Jonathan Marsh, 



2 Samuel Nash, 



3 Ebenezer Nash, 



4 *Samuel Marsh, 



5 Ephraim Nash, 

6 Samuel Crow, 




7 Thomas Selding, 

8 John Selding, 

9 William Rooker, 



10 Joseph Smith, 

11 Widow Craft, 



12 *Sam'l Dickinson, 



13 *Mr. Wm. William.s, 



14 *John Cole, 



15 *John Graves, 


16 *Stephen Belding, 

17 *Ebenezer Billing, 





18 *Samuel Belding, Jr., 


19 *Daniel Warner, 



20 *Widow Warner, 



Highway 40 rods wide, S. of Fort River- 

21 *Joseph Smith, 

22 *Ebenezer Wells, 




23 Nathaniel White, 



24 John Smith, Tailor, 

25 John Preston, 



26 Nathaniel Warner, 


27 Daniel Hubbard, 



28 *Col. Samuel Partrigg, 

29 Samuel Partrigg, Jr., 

30 Sam'l and Eben'r Moody, 

31 John Ingram, Sr., 

32 John Ingram, Jr., 

33 Samuel Ingram, 

34 Nathaniel Ingram, 

35 Jonathan Ingram, 

36 Thomas Goodman, 








37 John Smith, orphan, 

38 Samuel Barnard, 




A Highway 40 rods wide, goeth over New 
Swamp, and runs to Foot's Folly. 

39 Samuel Church, 45 o 

40 Josiah Church, 24 14 

41 Joseph Church, 16 i 

42 John Taylor, Sr., 68 1 1 

43 John Taylor, Jr., 17 8 

44 Eleazar Warner, 17 8 

45 John Hilyard, 17 8 

46 William Brown, 17 8 

47 *Nathaniel Dickinson, 3 11 

48 *Edward Church, 35 o 

49 Samuel Smith, Sr., 17 8 

50 James Smith, 46 1 1 


The third or eastern division, was called two miles in width, 
or the lots two miles in length. The number of lots was 93; two 
persons in the other divisions received an equivalent elsewhere, 
and three others drew as one. The head of a family seems to 
have drawn 10 rods and 6 feet in width or 41 J acres, for himself, 
and half as much for sons between 16 and 21, besides what he 
drew for meadow land. The width of the 93 lots, according to 
the measurers, was about 1971 rods, and there were no cross 
highways. A rod in width made four acres, and the division 
contained 7884 acres, as laid out, but the west line of the equiva- 
lent lands cut off about 3000 acres. There still remained in the 
three divisions about 10,000 acres, besides the highways. 

The Hadley measurers began the west line of the tract they 
were to lay out at the Brookfield road, and in order to not include 
the New Swamp and some other lands, they, in running northerly, 
inclined 13 or 14 degrees easterly of the course of the east line of 
Hadley. This west line determined the direction of those east of 
it, and carried the east division beyond the east line of the town,* 
into province land, afterwards called equivalent land, now in 
Belchertown and Pelham. When the line between Hadley and 
the equivalent land was fixed by the compass, it did not reduce the 
width of the east division at the south end, very much, but at the 
north end, it was reduced to half a mile. — In 1738, the town grant- 
ed to 31 persons, whose lots were in the northern part of the east 
division, and who had lost the most by the equivalent line, about 
600 acres, on the Flat Hills, so called, and west of them, between 
the second and third divisions and Mill River, and there were a 
few grants to others in this tract. f 

Amherst was not settled as early as South Hadley. There was 
an Indian war from 1722 to 1726, and perhaps it was deemed 
hazardous to remove families to either place, especially north of 

*Perhaps they knew not where the eastern line was. 

There had been grants in or near the east division in 1698, viz., 38 acres to ten men, 
southwest of Lawrence's Swamp; and a tract to Samuel Boltwood northward of Foot's Folly 
Swamp. These grants were not regarded in the distribution of 1703. 

•{•Prices of Land. — After the lands in Amherst were laid out, there was an Indian war for 
ten years, and outlands were of little worth. In inventories, land in the first and second 
divisions was valued at about one shilling per acre, and in the east division at six pence, and 
even as low as four pence. From 1713 to 1722, the value of the best lots of land increased, 
to two shillings and sixpence or three shillings per acre, and of the poorer to half as much. 
After settlements were made, or from 172S to 1731, the more desirable lots seem to have 
been worth from six to ten shillings ($1,00 to $1,67) per acre, and those less favorably situ- 
ated, from three to five shillings per acre. These are prices in proclamation money, six 
shillings to a dollar. In province bills, the nominal value was much higher. 


the mountain. Permanent settlements may have begun in Am- 
herst in 1727, and in South Hadley about two years before. 

Division of Lands in South Hadley and Granby. 

The first grant of land by Hadley south of Mount Holyoke, 
was in February, 1675, when Thomas Selden had six acres at 
the mouth of Dry Brook, adjoining the Connecticut, below the 
present Rock Ferry. In 1682, Timothy Nash had a grant of a 
parcel of land between Bachelor's brook and Stony brook, ad- 
joining the great river, "at the southernmost part of our bounds." 
This land is now owned by Emerson Bates and H. Moody. In 
1680, the town granted 20 acres each to David Hoyt, Thomas 
Wells and Joseph Hovey, "beyond Mount HoUiake, on Bache- 
lor's brook;" and in 1688, John Lawrence had a grant of 3 or 
4 acres towards Bachelor's brook. The grants to the four men 
last named, seem to have become void. — In 1684, four men had 
liberty to set up a saw-mill on Stony brook or Bachelor's brook, 
and the right to cut timber. In 1699, four other men had per- 
mission to erect a saw-mill at the falls of Bachelor's brook, below 
the former grant, with the frame and right to timber. The 
mills erected under these grants are not known. In the proprie- 
tor's records in 1721 and 1722, the "old mill place" on Bache- 
lor's brook is mentioned, which was above Allen's present paper- 
mill; also the "old mill pond" on Stony brook, which was below 
Smith's present grist-mill, and a saw-mill below the pond. When 
Hadley had been settled 60 years, there had been no grants south 
of Holyoke but those noticed, and the only building was a saw- 
mill. The lands belonged to the great horse and cattle pasture 
of Hadley, as well as most of those north of the mountain. Deer 
also fed in these open, park-like forests. 

On the 25th of January, 1720, Hadley voted to lay out the 
land on the south side of Mount Holyoke, according to the list 
of estates and polls, taken in the same month; and to add to them, 
for the proprietors or town an estate of ;^I50, the head and estate 
of Mr. Chauncey, and the polls of some aged* or infirm men, 
whose heads were not taxed. The amount of estates and polls 
was ;^6o63, 8s. How polls were estimated does not appear. The 
number of those who were entitled to lands south of Holyoke 
was 117. Of these, 95 belonged to Hadley, 21 to Hatfield, and 
the heirs of Thomas Dickinson to Connecticut. 

♦Among the aged men were two of the first settlers of Hadley, viz., Ens. Chileab Smith 
and John Ingram. Ens. Chileab Smith let his sons draw his shares, and his name is not 
in this list of proprietors. 



The rule for dividing the lands south of Mount Holyoke was the following list which was 
taken in January, 1720, with a few additions made by the town. 117 names. 
East side of the street, beginning at the 

north end. 






Mr. Samuel Partridge, 
Mr. Peter Montague, 
John Smith, 2d, (orphan) 
Lt. John Smith, 
Ichabod Smith, 
John Montague, Sr., 
Corp. John Montague, 
Experience Porter, 
Samuel Porter, Jr., 
Daniel Hubbard, 
Timothy Hillyer, 
Town or Proprietors, 
Rev. Isaac Chauncey, 

Middle Highway 
Capt. Samuel Barnard, 
Corp. Samuel Dickinson, 
Lt. Nehemiah Dickinson, 
Israel Dickinson, 
Deac. John Smith, 
Mr. Samuel Porter, Esq. 
Nathaniel White, Jr., 
Deac. Nathaniel White, 
Joseph White, 
Joseph Eastman, 
Serg. John Marsh, 
Ebenezer Marsh, 
John Goodman, 
John Goodman, Jr., 
Lt. Samuel Cook, 
Lt. Thomas Hovey, 
Wid. Mehetable Dickinson, 
John Lane, 
West side of the street, beginning at the 

south end. 
Joseph Kellogg, 
John Kellogg, 
William Rooker, 
Mary, wid. of Preserved Smith, 
Timothy Eastman, 
William Montague, 
Doct. John Barnard, 
Sergt. Samuel Moody, 
Ebenezer Moody, 
Sergt. William Dickinson, 
Mr. Jonathan Marsh, 
Samuel Crow, 
Luke Smith, 
Thomas Taylor, 
Ebenezer Taylor, 
Samuel Taylor, 
Sergt. Joseph Nash, 
Mr. Daniel Marsh, 
Wid. Elizabeth Warner, 






















Jacob Warner, 

Thomas Goodman, 83 

Lt. Westwood Cook, 158 

Middle Highway. 

John Nash, 67 

Samuel Nash, 24 

Thomas Selden, 4° 

Ebenezer Selden, 39 

Samuel Church, 72 

Joseph Church, 5° 

Benjamin Church, 47 

Nathaniel Kellogg, 118 

Ens. Moses Cook, 106 

Solomon Boltwood, 53 

Samuel Crowfoot, 26 

Noah Cook, 53 

Corp. Chileab Smith, 59 

Sergt. Samuel Smith, 104 

Elisha Perkins, 29 

Nathaniel Ingram, 62 

John Ingram, Sr., 44 

On the North Highway and at the Mill 

Daniel Warner, 43 ' 

Samuel Gaylord, 52 

John Preston, 80 

John Ingram, 2d, 49 

John Ingram, 3d, 23 

Sergt. Joseph Smith, 32 

Jonathan Smith, 23 

Benjamin Smith, 21 i 

On the New Street, on the Pine Plain. 


Eleazar Warner, 

Stephen Warner, 

Joseph Smith, Jr., called drummer, 

John Nash, Jr., 

Peter Montague, Jr., 

Nathaniel Kellogg, Jr., 

Samuel Boltwood, 

Ephraim Nash, 





Continuation of Middle Highway. 

Job Marsh, 

John Selden, 

John Taylor, Sr., 

John Taylor, Jr., 

John Smith, Jr., son of Deac, 

John White, 

Ebenezer Smith, 

Peter Domo, 

William Murray, 

43 1° 

71 6 

90 o 

21 10 

28 10 

25 o 

24 o 

20 O 

18 10 


ELD Men. 

£■ s. 

£. s. 


Ebenezer Billing, 



Cornet Samuel fielding, 

5 ° 


Ebenezer Warner, 


19 10 

Ebenezer Wells, 



Jonathan Smith, 



Nathaniel Dickinson, 2d, 

13 10 

4 10 

Joseph Kellogg, 



Jonathan Graves, 

3 ° 


Thomas Dickinson's heirs in 

2 10 


6 10 


Col. Samuel Partridge, Esq., 

Thomas Nash, 

Isaac Hubbard, 

Richard Church, 

John Graves, 

Ichabod Porter, 

Jonathan Cowls, 

Joseph Smith, 

Sergt. Stephen fielding, 

Deac. Samuel Marsh, 

Nathaniel Dickinson, 

Samuel Dickinson, 3 o £6063 8 

Daniel Warner, 12 o 

The inhabitants of Hadley in the preceding Hst are nearly all 
arranged according to their residence. A few may not be rightly 

Falls Woods Field was the only general field laid out south of 
Holyoke. It was named Falls Woods, because it was wood-land, 
near the falls. This field was voted March 14, 1720, and every 
proprietor of Hadley was to have his share. The western boundary 
'was the great river, the southern was Col. Pynchon's north line; 
and the eastern line began 361 rods and 9 links from the great 
river, on Col. Pynchon's line, and ran north to Stony brook, and 
this brook was to be the northern limit. The lots ran from the 
great river to the east side. Every man was to fence in proportion 
to the acres he had in the field. The whole fence was above 
HOC rods, and was to be made up by the last of May, 1721. 
One pound of estate drew between 46 and 47 rods of land, and 
the whole field contained about 1775 acres. 

Homelots were voted March 14, 1720, and they were laid out 
in 1720 and 1721. Every man drew a homelot according to his 
estate. These lots were in nine places or divisions, and they 
selected land which they considered proper for houselots and 
homesteads, avoiding pine plains, and low, wet lands. They did 
not reject elevated situations, as Chileab's hill and Cold hill. 
Sandy hill, so called, a central place on the roads to Springfield, 

*Such lists are given with a view to show who were the inhabitants of Hadley at certain 
times, and for other purposes. 

In 1701, the eight men in Hadley who drew the most land, were Samuel Porter, Daniel 
Marsh, Nehemiah Dickinson, Peter Montague, Samuel Partridge, Jr., Westwood Cook, 
Nathaniel White and Thomas Selden. — In 1720, the eight men highets in the valuation, 
were Samuel Porter, Westwood Cook, Peter Montague, Daniel Marsh, Nathaniel Kellogg, 
Nathaniel White, Experience Porter and Luke Smith. 

The four John Smiths in the roll of names in 1720, were Deac. John Smith, son of Philip; 
John Smith, orphan, son of John who was slain in 1676; Lt. John Smith, son of Chileab; 
and John Smith, son of Deac. John. A fifth John Smith, son of Ebenezer and grandson 
of Chileab, arrived at the age of 21 years in 1720. 


and the site of much of the present village, had no homelots on 
the west side. All the homelots contained looo acres; 6 pounds 
of estate drew about one acre. 

Meadow land was voted in February, 1722, and was laid out 
the same year, in six meadows, named Stony brook meadow, 
Chapin's meadow, Great meadow. Little meadow, Long meadow 
on Taylor's brook, and Pichawamiche meadow. Most of these 
meadow lots were within the present limits of Granby, and 
some were swampy. There were similar mowing lands on Bach- 
elor's brook and elsewhere. In those days, the hay was all ob- 
tained from low grounds, many of them marshy. The meadow 
land distributed was 500 acres, and 12 pounds of estate were 
entitled to about one acre. 

Five more distributions were voted in half a century, viz., one 
of 5000 acres in 1722; one of 4000 acres in 1731; one of 3000 
acres in 1752; one of 2500 acres in 1770; and one of 2000 acres 
in 1772. Each of the 117 proprietors, or his heirs or assigns, had 
a first and second choice, or two lots, in each of these five divi- 
sions, all of which contained 16,500 acres. 

These five distributions of land were made in a very singular 
manner. Each proprietor selected his lots where he pleased, in 
any part of 16,500 acres not already taken up, with some slight 
limitations. The number on the paper which a man drew from 
the box, did not designate his lot of land, but his turn for choosing 
a lot, If he drew No. 40, he knew that 39 men had a right to select 
their shares, and cull the best unappropriated lands they could 
find, before his turn came. Many inconveniences resulted from this 
skipping and culling. The later locations of land often over-lapped 
those made many years before. Many lots in the later distributions 
were not surveyed and bounded for many years, and not a few 
have been laid out since 1800, especially on the mountain.* 

There were 19,775 ^^res of land in the 8 divisions, and a few 
pieces were sold by the proprietors. Every pound of the 117 
estates was entitled to a little more than 3I acres of land, good 
and poor, in 52 years. 

The Crank. — The tract of land in the south-eastern part of 
Granby, granted to the inhabitants south of Holyoke in 1727, 
and noticed on page 187, was called the Crank in old land records 
and deeds. I find no account of the division of this tract. It 
was not considered very valuable. In 1736, nine proprietors 

*The surveyors employed to lay out the lands south of Holyoke, were first, Timothy 
Dwight of Northampton, in 1720; 2d, Nathaniel Kellogg of Hadley; 3d, Eleazar Nash of 
Granby; 4th, Gardner Preston of South Hadley. 


sold their undivided rights to Capt. James Bowdoin of Boston. 
Many others sold their rights in the Crank. 

Highways. — Northampton and Hadley, in early days, had a 
cartway to Springfield through the territory that is now South 
Hadley. In 1662, there was an "old cart bridge" across Bache- 
lor's river or brook. The highway laid in 1664, went "as the cart- 
way now runs, in breadth 20 rods." It was laid again in 1710, 
"as the road now runs 10 rods wide." Long before 1710, two 
ways, the western and eastern, were traveled from Dry brook 
easterly of Rock ferry, to Sandy hill, where they came together, 
a little north of the Female Seminary. It is not known which was 
the original road. The western road could not have been traveled 
in high water, but it is more often called the Springfield or country 
road than the other in the land book, in 1720 and after.* 

*These two roads have been continued to the present day, with some alterations. The 
western traveled way, after crossing the valley or dingle called by the odd name of Lubber's 
Hole, near the present village, passed west of the buildings now on the west side of the street, 
to near the north-east corner of the burying yard. The eastern road has always passed 
over the elevation called Chileab's hUl. 

In 1720, there were various paths in the scattered woods, on both sides of the mountain, 
made by men and animals. Hunters and other men, domestic animals, deer and turkies 
crossed the mountain in those low places called "cracks'" by the fathers, especially at the 
Round Hill Crack, where is now the road between Amherst and Granby and South Hadley. 
Here was a beaten path which extended southerly and crossed Bachelor's brook, before 
there were any settlers in Amherst or South Hadley. At a later period, the hunters some- 
times called this Crack, or a low place west of it, the Turkey Pass. Another path passed 
over Cold Hill, and extended to the eastern limits of the township. 

The prices of a few pieces of land in the early divisions of South Hadley, have been ob- 
tained. In 1722, some lots in Falls Woods Field were appraised at two shillings per acre, 
and homelots and meadows from six pence to a shilling more. In 1725, a few lots in Falls 
Woods and Great Meadow were as high as four shillings and six pence per acre. In 1728 
and 1729, good lands in Falls Woods had advanced to seven and eight shillings per acre; 
and some large lots in the division of 5000 acres were valued at various prices, from four to 
six shillings an acre. Choice meadow land, not very distant from houses, was as high as 
eighteen shillings an acre. As settlers became more numerous, the price of lands advanced. 
The prices mentioned refer to dollars at six shillings, not to province bUls. 

There is a tradition that parents in Hadley shed tears over their sons and daughters, and 
implored the blessings of Heaven upon them, when they left the old village to settle in the 
woods south of the mountain. Some of the new settlers, both south and east, returned to 
the old homes every S abbath, and attended meeting in the old place, and heard Mr. Chauncey 

Many elderly men, who had always cultivated the intervals of Hadley, doubted whether 
families could get a living on the uplands of South Hadley and Amherst, and talked dis- 
couragingly to the young people who proposed to remove to those places. 

The south settlers increased faster than those east. In 1 73 1, the taxable "South Inhab- 
itants" were 37, and the taxable "East Inhabitants," 18. The south inhabitants on page 
284, are arranged with some regard to residence. Several were single men. The five 
Taylors at the beginning of the list were not very far from the Springfield line, on the plain 
and on the Pynchon lot. Most of the next i6 were on the old road between Stony brook 
and the top of Chileab's hill; the last 16 and perhaps 2 of the preceding 16, were on the other 
roads, east of this m ain road. About eight were within the present limits of Granby. Thos. 
Goodman, Jr. and William Gaylord were early settlers in Falls Woods, but may not have 
been there in 1731. 


Early in 1722, Samuel Porter, Esq., Lt. John Smith and Ex- 
perience Porter laid out for the proprietors 21 highways, most 
of them 8 rods wide, which are all recorded. The two Spring- 
field roads to Sandy hill, and one thence to Springfield line, 
remained as before. A road from Cold hill easterly to the end of 
their bounds, was called by the name of "Pichawamiche road." 

Division of Hadley Inner Commons. 

Hadley, having disposed of the Outer or Outward Commons, 
voted, on the lOth of May, 1731, to divide the Inner or Inward 
Commons among the inhabitants; and that each should have his 
proportion in these lands, according to his real estate, as it stood 
in the list taken in January, 1731. Rev. Mr. Chauncey's real 
estate was to be taken into the list, and each poll to be estimated 
at three pounds estate, and all Indian, mulatto and negro ser- 
vants to be estimated as polls. 

The attempt to divide the Inner Commons did not then succeed. 
The proprietors of the undivided lands between Mount Holyoke 
and Sunderland, assumed the management of them, and held 
meetings. In August, 1733, they decided that it would be advan- 
tageous to improve the lands for the growth of fire-wood and 
timber, "which is the principal thing, they said, that said commons 
are needed for." They deemed them unfit for cultivation. They 
ordered that walnut and oak trees less than 12 inches in diameter 
at the stub, should not be cut for fire-wood, but they might be cut 
or timber. There were similar votes in 1740 and 1741. In 1737, 
maple and elm staddles under 8 inches in diameter might not 
be cut, but in 1741, they were free for all. In 1739 and 1741, 
each proprietor had liberty to take one pine tree for boards to 
every 15 pounds estate.* 

November 30, 1741, after a delay of 10 years, the proprietors 
voted to divide the commons according to the rule of 1731, 
and chose a committee to get the lands surveyed. Nathaniel 
Kellogg, Jr. was the surveyor. 

♦In 17 1 3, by an order of the town, oak staddles under 12 inches in diameter might not 
be taken from the commons. In 1726, walnut and oak staddles under 8 inches at the stub 
might not be cut, except for timber. In 1727, oak and walnut staddles under 10 inches at 
the stub were not to be cut, except for timber. 

It may be inferred from these votes, from 1713 to 1741, that good timber was not plenty 
on the Hadley commons, in consequence of burning the woods. 

The New Swamp of the Hadley records was divided as Inner Commons, except some 
on the east side, which was included in the first division of East Hadley. The old north 
road from Hadley to Amherst, crosses this swamp. — After East Hadley was settled, the 
plantation was sometimes named New Swamp. 

The vote of March 4, 1700, that certain land (page 273) should lie as common land 
forever, was repealed May 10, 1731. 



A list of the real estate of each inhabitant of Hadley, in January, 1 731, with the addition 
of three pounds for each poll, and servant. The Inner Commons were divided according 
to these sums.* 

North end of street on east si 


Mr. Samuel Partrigg, 

Cotton Partrigg, 
Westwood Cook, Jr. 
Peter Montague's heirs, 
Ja's Smith, son of Preserved, 
John Smith, 3d, son of orphan, 
Hezekiah Smith, 
Noah Smith, 
Lt. John Smith, 
Ichabod Smith, 
John Montague, Jr. 
Nathaniel Montague, 
Heirs of John Montague, Jr. 
Heirs of John Marsh, and 
widow Sarah Marsh, 
Samuel Porter, 
Eleazar Porter, Esq. 
Joseph Hubbard, 
William Fargeson, 
Daniel Hubbard, 
Town Lot. 
Mr. Isaac Chauncey, 

Middle Highway. 
Samuel Barnard, 
Deac. Samuel Dickinson, 
John Smith, son of Deac. 
Joseph Smith, son of Deac. 
Daniel Smith, shoemaker. 
Job Marsh, 

Deac. Nathaniel White, 
John White, 
William White, 
Ebenezer White, 
Joseph Eastman, 
Ebenezer Marsh, 
John Goodman, 
James Goodman, 
Lt. Samuel Cook, 
Lt. Thomas Hovey, 
Wid. Mehetabel Dickinson's 
sons Daniel and John, 

South end of street on 
James Kellogg, 


South Highway. 



William Rooker, 




Timothy Eastman, 




Doct. Thomas Barnard, on 



School lot. 



Samuel Moody, Sr. 






Samuel Moody, Jr. 






John Moody, 





Nathan Moody, 





Ens. Wm. Dickinson, 







Samuel Crow, 





Capt. Luke Smith, 




Jona. Smith, son of Luke, 





Samuel Nash, 



Daniel Marsh, 






Wm. Marsh's heirs. 





Jacob Warner, 




Thomas Goodman, 




Samuel Goodman, 



Lt. Westwood Cook, 






Middle Highway. 



Mr. John Nash, 



Ebenezer Selden, 



Mr. Thomas Selden, 





Samuel Church, 







Serg. Benjamin Church, 






Ezekiel Kellogg, 






Lt. Moses Cook, 




Solomon Bolt wood. 





Samuel Catlin, 




Samuel Crowfoot, 




Noah Cook, 





Sergt, Chileab Smith, 

















At north end, and on the new or back 


William Murray, 8 

Samuel Gaylord, 36 10 

Nathaniel Ingram, 42 9 9 

Aaron Cook, 31 10 
Mr. Joseph Smith and son 

Benjamin, 9 10 

Mr. Samuel Mighill, 3 

Peletiah Smith, 12 15 

*Tlie names of men iii Hadley were formerly placed on valuations and tax bills accord- 
ing to their dwellings. (See page 204.) The assessors, in entering the names on the list 
of 1731, proceeded down on the east side of the main street, and up on the west side; then 
through the north highway, and down in the back street. Probably there were some devi- 
ations. Nathaniel Ingram and Aaron Cook may not be in their places. Some buildings 
at the north end had been swept away or endangered by the river. 

The residence of the 147 persons in the list of 1731, was as follows; — 90 in the old town, 
2 near School meadow, 37 in the second precinct, south of Holyoke, and 18 in what was 
afterwards the third precinct and Amherst. The latter marked H. were from Hatfield. 




s. d. 

South Inhabitants, (South 


Widow Warner's daughters 

£. s. 

Mary and Joanna, 


John Taylor, 


Stephen Warner, 



Joseph Taylor, 

6 12 

Joseph Smith, Jr., cooper, 


Samuel Taylor, Jr. 


Nathaniel Kellogg, Jr., 


12 6 

Joshua Taylor, 


Nathaniel Kellogg, Sr., 



Moses Taylor, 


Ralph Way, 



Nathaniel Ingram, Jr. 


Doct. Wm. Squire and 

William Gaylord, 


Doct. Richard Crouch, 


John Preston's heirs. 


John Selding, 



Samuel Rugg, 


Isaac Selding, 


Nathaniel White, Jr. 


Jonathan Atherton, 


Thomas Goodman, Jr. 


Israel Dickinson, 


8 6 

Samuel Smith, 


Peter Domo, 


Samuel Kellogg, 


Thomas Temple, 


Richard Church, 


Samuel Nash, Jr. 


Samuel Taylor, Sr. 


Abel Roberts, 


William Smith, 
Daniel Nash, Sr. 

10 10 


14 9 


Daniel Nash, 2d, 


East Inhabitants, 


William Montague, 

John Ingram, Sr. 


I 3 

Joseph White, 


John Ingram, Jr. 


Luke Montague, 


Ebenezer Kellogg, 


Ephraim Nash, 


John Cowls, H. 


Timothy Nash, 


Jonathan Cowls, H. 


Joseph Nash, 


Samuel Boltwood, 


Ebenezer Moody, 


Samuel Hawley, N.H.&H. 



Ebenezer Moody, Jr. 


Nathaniel Church, 


Peter Montague, 


John Wells, H. 


Chileab Smith, Jr. 


Aaron Smith, 



John Smith, son of Ebenezer, 


Nathaniel Smith, 



Jonathan Smith, son of Joseph 

Richard Chauncey, 


Smith, Sr., cooper, 


Stephen Smith, H. 



William Dickinson, Jr. 


John Nash, Jr. 


Nehemiah Dickinson, 

3 "° 

Joseph Wells, H. 


Joseph Kellogg, 


Ebenezer Scovil, 


Thomas Taylor, 


Ebenezer Ingram, 


Ebenezer Taylor, 


Ebenezer Dickinson, 


Timothy Hilyard, 


School Meadow. 

John Lane, 


Jonathan Smith, H. 


Jonathan Dickinson, 


278 12 

^5' I 3 
In the year 1742, the first, second, third and fourth divisions 
of the Commons were allotted and surveyed, each division having 
several distinct tracts, and all those whose names were in the 
list of real estate and polls in 1731, or their successors, in their 
names, had a lot in each division. Many highways were reserved 
across and between the rows of lots. Excepting the Pine Plain 
west of Spruce Swamp, these four divisions comprehended the 
commons in Hadley, from near the foot of Holyoke to Sunderland 
line, and included the land north of Mill River, which is now in 
Amherst. Mount Warner was in tracts 3 and 4, in the first 


In 1743, the fifth or mountain division was laid out and divided. 
It extended from the equivalent land in Cold Spring, (Belcher- 
town,) on the east, to the common fence of Hockanum and Fort 
meadow, on the west, 1750 rods, or almost 5I miles, comprising 
most of the northern declivity of Holyoke, and some land not on 
the mountain slope. The lots were opposite the south end of the 
third precinct, or Amherst, for 1200 rods, and farther west for 550 
rods. The Bay or Brookfield road separated them from Amherst 
about 1 150 rods. The lots terminated on the top of the mountain, 
except a few beyond the east end of the mountain. The length 
of the lots was estimated, for it could not be measured, and varied 
in the surveyor's record,fromabout half amileto upwards of a mile, 
averaging about three-fourths of a mile. The lines between the 
lots were north and south by the needle. It was ascertained 
many years after that the eastern lot was partly in Belchertown. 

Sheep pasture. — A cow or sheep pasture on the north side of 
Holyoke, was voted by the town in 1725. In 1737, they voted to 
fence in as a sheep pasture, the tract called cow pasture, to en- 
courage the keeping of sheep. In 1749, the fence was rebuilt or 
repaired around the sheep pasture. These pastures were west of 
the common fence and mountain division. That of 1749 was on 
the northern and north-western slope of the mountain, and a part 
of it extended westward from the common fence above a mile, 
almost to the Hockanum highway. — In 1754, this sheep pasture 
was divided among the 147 persons in the list of 1731, making 
very narrow lots. Many of them ended on the top of the mountain, 
but some on the north-western side. A few lots were laid out 
north of the sheep pasture. There was to be a path two rods 
wide across the lots. This was called the sixth division of commons. 

In 1754, lots were drawn in the 7th division, which was on the 
pine plain, east of the homelots and others granted on that plain, 
and west of Fort River swamp and Spruce swamp. This narrow, 
irregular division stretched northward, from the highway by 
Fort meadow fence, above two miles, to near the Stone Bridge, 
so called. The portions of men were small. 

The real estates in the valuation of 1731, with three pounds 
for each poll, amounted to 3603 pounds in the town book. The 
surveyor's total seems to be three pounds less.* 

♦Nathaniel Kellogg surveyed the lands and proportioned the lots; he registered the divi- 
sions and lots and drew plans of five divisions which are extant. He was a skillful surveyor, 
but not skilled in spelling. In 1742 and 1743, '^^ received 15 shillings a day for surveying, 
and chain-men had 6 shillings. In silver, his wages would have been not above five shil- 
lings, and those of the chain-men about two shillings. They boarded themselves. 



The quantity of land drawn by one pound in each division, 
and the whole number of acres drawn by ;{^36o3, at that rate, 
in each division, were as follows: — 



1st Division 

£1 drew I 



9^1 • 

3d " 




5th " 

I " 


6th " 


7th " 


£1 drew in all, 3 




All drew 













In 52 years, from 1703 to 1754, both inclusive, near forty 
thousand acres of land were divided among the inhabitants of 
Hadley, and a few non-resident proprietors, besides the land in 
the Crank, which belonged to the south precinct. In 1770 and 
1772, four thousand five hundred acres of the poorer lands, south 
of Holyoke, were ordered to be distributed. 

Those old Puritans, the first settlers of Hadley, in distributing 
lands, were more mindful of the interest of those who had but 
little property, than their descendants were in later divisions. The 
proportion of land received by those in moderate circumstances 
became less and less in the subsequent divisions. The head of a 
family without real estate, drew above 50 acres in 10,000 acres, in 
the Amherst divisions of 1703; he had not far from 50 acres in 
about 20,000 acres in South Hadley and Granby under the 
rule of 1720; and he received only 11 acres in 13,000 acres of 
commons distributed according to the vote of 173 1. The division 
of 1 73 1 must have been contrived by the large land-holders, and 
aided by a considerable portion of the middling class. Their 
rule was, — "whosoever hath, to him shall be given." The wealthy 
man received as much land on account of his slave, as the poor 
man on his own account. 

Many persons obtained farms for themselves or their sons, 
from their lots in the commons, but the greater part of the first 
owners of the commons in the three parishes did not settle on any 
of their lots, nor did their sons. The land-holders did not become 
rich by these great accessions of land. The sales were too slow 
and the prices too low. Wild lands were very abundant, and the 
supply far exceeded the demand. The Inner Commons of the 
first parish of Hadley continued to be used chiefly for wood, 
timber and pasturage, for more than 30 years after 1743. There 
was much pine plain land, and this had always been despised by 
the people of Hadley. Good timber was scarce, especially white 


pine. Previous to 1770, perhaps half a dozen houses had been 
erected on the 13,000 acres of Inner Commons.* 

Summary of Grants and Distributions. 

It may be estimated that the old township of Hadley contained 
about 89 square miles, or 57,000 acres;f and that 42 square miles, 
or 27,000 acres, were south of the summit of Holyoke, and 47 
square miles, or 30,000 acres, were north of the summit. The 
grants and distributions were nearly as follows: — 

North of Holyoke. 

Distributions before 1703, ...... 3500 

Divisions in Amherst in 1703, ..... 10000 

Flat Hills and lands adjoining, ..... 900 

7 Divisions, from I74Z to 1754, ..... 1330° 


The highways and streams, the nooks and corners not distributed in the divisions, the 
grants to Hockanum people on the mountain, and some rocks and precipices on Holyoke 
not reckoned as land, may make 2300 acres. 

South of Holyoke. 


8 Divisions in South Hadley and Granby under the rule of 1720, 19775 
In the Crank, supposed, ...... 4500 

Pynchon's Grant at the Falls, ..... 500 

The highways, ponds and streams, lands sold by the proprietors, the rocks and steeps 
and corners not surveyed, may be 2225 acres. The Crank may contain more or less than 
4500 acres. The extent of South Hadley and Granby may exceed 42 square miles. 

*The value of the Inner Commons in inventories, down to 1758, was generally from 
three shillings to nine shillings per acre, in good money. Some lots were valued at less than 
two shillings per acre, and a few at twelve shillings or more. Some of the Mount Warner 
lots seem to have been accounted as valuable as any. 

•j-The computed extent of Hadley on pages 186 and 187 is too small. Chandler in 171 5, 
measured from the line which the inhabitants of Hadley supposed to be the south line 
of their ten miles, 3 miles and 100 rods to Springfield line, making the township 13 miles 
and 100 rods in length. This south line of the ten miles must have been conjectural, and 
too far south. It is calculated from the statemap,and various measurements, that the entire 
township of Hadley was full 14 miles in length, and on an average, not far from 6| miles 
in breadth, making about 89 square miles or 57,000 acres. 

It is not pretended that the estimates of the square miles in the old township, and north 
and south of the summit of Holyoke, are free from errors. The writer has not the exact 
measures that are necessary for accuracy. — An old estimate that the land in South Hadley 
and Granby was 24,000 acres, did not probably include the mountain. 

Mount Holyoke is about 65 miles in length, and with the spurs and smaller hills connected 
with it, may average one mile and a third in breadth, making 8^ square miles or 5550 acres. 
The mountain occupies almost one-tenth of the old township. The summit in some places, 
is about 8^ miles south of the old Sunderland line and 55 miles north of the old Springfield 
line. Some parts of it are further from the Springfield line. 



This hamlet in Hadley, between Mount Holyoke and the 
Connecticut, and about three miles south of Hadley village, 
was commenced by a few men from Northampton. Capt. John 
Lyman* and his son Zadok were the first settlers about 1744, 
and Ebenezer Pomeroy, the 3d, son-in-law of Capt. Lyman, 
joined them in a few years, and afterwards his brother, Stephen 
Pomeroy. Gideon Lyman, Esq., purchased lands at Hockanum, 
and his son, Gideon Lyman, Jr. lived there some years, and 
after his death, another son, Elijah Lyman; also Caleb Lyman, 
the youngest son of Capt. John, Israel Lyman, the oldest son of 
Zadok, and Ethan Pomeroy, son of Ebenezer. Stephen Coats, 
a native of Westfield, lived in a small house in the ferry lane, 
and took care of the ferry. These were all the heads of families 
previous to 1780. 

The first settlers, with other proprietors, for their own conven- 
ience, opened a road through their own lands about three-fourths 
of a mile, from the highway into Hockanum meadow, southerly 
to the mountain gate; and travelers soon began to use the new 
road and to neglect the upper road, on the lower part of the moun- 
tain, which had been traveled about 85 years. In March, 1745, 
the town allowed Capt. Lyman to build a fence across the old 
Springfield road, provided he would keep a good gate. 

The Hockanum men, having become inhabitants of Hadley 
after 1731, had no share in the commons. But the proprietors, 
in May, 1754, as an equivalent for the new highway and a little 
money, granted to Capt. John Lyman; Israel, Azariah and Luke 
Lyman, sons of Zadok deceased; Mr. Gideon Lyman of North- 
ampton and Ebenezer Pomeroy, the land from the lower side of 
the old Springfield road to the top of Mount Holyoke, beginning 
against the south end of the skirts, and extending along the moun- 
tain north-easterly to the sheep pasture lots, perhaps near a mile. 
The Lymans were "to allow the highway across their land to 
lie open where it now is." In 1761, a county road was first laid 
through Hockanum street, from the mountain gate to Fort River 
bridge, 587 rods.f 

*Capt. Lyman's house in Northampton was burnt Dec. 8, 1742, and two of his children 
perished in the flames. There is a tradition that he desired to leave the homestead where 
this afflictive event had occurred, and that this was one reason for his removing across the 

The Lymans and Pomeroys had relatives and friends in Northampton, and for many 
years they had more intercourse with the people of that town than with those of Hadley. 

•)-In 1761, Capt. Lyman lived on the east side of the way, 1 16 rods north of the mountain 
gate; his son Caleb lived on the same place, and the house still remains. 


In April, 1750, Zadok Lyman purchased of Elias Lyman of 
Northampton, the island in Connecticut River, below Hockanum 
meadow, estimated at 2j acres, for £^, 6s. 8d. The island gradu- 
ally increased and became valuable, and is now connected with 
the main land. 

A ferry was first established at Hockanum by the county court 
in 1755.* There was before no licensed ferry across the Connect- 
icut between Springfield and Hadley village. There were two 
ferries to accommodate the travel between this village and 
Northampton. There was no licensed ferry connected with South 
Hadley until 1770. 

Peter Domo. 

A few years before 1719, a man named Peter Domo or Domer appeared in Hadley. In 
1 719, he married Mary Crowfoot. He lived some years in a small house on the pine plain 
street, near where Cook's brick blacksmith's shop now stands,-j- and had four or five daugh- 
ters and one son. He was poor and industrious, not ambitious, and, according to tradition, 
his wife governed him and the family, which gave him no uneasiness except when excited 
by the sneers and sarcasms of mischievous wags. After a sheep pasture had been enclosed 
on the side of Holyoke, as early as 1737, Peter is found living in a log house west of the 
meadow fence, and north of the sheep pasture fence, near the corner where they intersect, 
and but few rods from either. It is supposed that the owners of the sheep induced him to 
establish himself in that solitary place, and paid him for taking care of the flock. His house 
was on the south-western part of a high plain, called Lawrence's plain, near where the 
gentle slope of the mountain begins. There were many acres of this plain within the mead- 
ow fence, unappropriated, and Peter could use as much of it as he chose to clear. He made 
an opening of considerable extent, and raised wheat, rye, corn and garden vegetables. He 

Zadok Lyman lived on the west side of the way, a few rods south of the present house of 
Samuel Russell, and there he kept a public house from 1746 until his death, the latter part 
of 1753. ^'^ widow was licensed in 1754. Ebenezer Pomeroy, who lived in the house next 
north, where the Pomeroy house still stands, was the next innkeeper in Hockanum. 

E. Pomeroy's tavern had the sign of the White Horse. At the August court, 1759, 
Joseph Hawley complained of Pomeroy for misrule and disorder in his house, on the 6th of 
August, in suffering young people of both sexes from Northampton, to sing, dance and revel 
in his house, to a late hour. He confessed and was fined ten shillings. The young men 
were also complained of for drinking and tippling some hours, and for fiddling, singing, 
dancing and reveling "for three hours after nine o'clock," at Pomeroy's. Charles Phelps 
of Hadley appeared as counsel for the dancers, at the February court, 1760, and the indict- 
ment was quashed. Seven of the young men were from Northampton and one from Hock- 

*Gideon Lyman, Jr. was first appointed ferryman, in 1755. Stephen Coats was appoint- 
ed in 1759, ^^'^ many years after. He conveyed people across the river before 1755. Israel 
Lyman began to keep the ferry soon after the Revolution commenced, and continued a long 
time. The fare in 1756 was five coppers, (3 J pence,) for man and horse, between May 15 
and Nov. 15, and six coppers, (4 pence,) for the rest of the year. For a single person, one 
penny from May 15 to Nov. 15, and one penny and a third, or two coppers, for the rest of 
the year. Coppers were estimated at two-thirds of a penny. The fare for man and horse 
at Hadley village was a little less. 

•j-Peter had a small house and orchard on this sandy place, which James Kellogg bought. 
In 1759, they were still called "Domer's orchard and old house," and were appraised at 40 
shillings; the land was supposed to belong to the town. 


was aided by his wife and children. The cattle that roved in the woods came and looked 
wistfully through the common fence at Peter's corn and cabbage, but the spacious ditch, 
high bank, and strong post and rail fence were an effectual barrier against them. The wild 
animals gave him more annoyance. The howling of the wolves was sometimes heard in the 
night, but if they approached too near the sheep-fold, the faithful dog gave an alarm. The 
raccoons plundered Peter's corn-field, and the woodchucks sometimes came into his garden, 
and the foxes, hawks and owls carried off his fowls. He destroyed some of the depredators 
with his trap and gun, and he shot partridges and turkies on the side of the mountain, and 
rarely a deer. Peter lived a number of years in quietness and peace in this sequestered 
nook, about two miles from all human habitations. But changes and improvements were 
approaching, and they never come without bringing discomfort to some. The talk of divid- 
ing the sheep pasture and the land adjoining foreboded ill to Peter, for he was only a squatter 
on public land. It is believed that he foresaw the evil and removed to Granby, then a part 
of South Hadley, before the division took place. The records show that the land he had 
occupied, called "Peter Domo's Improvements," was allotted to other men in 1754. He 
died in 1763, and his grave-stone may be seen in the South Hadley burying yard. He left 
some property to his children. 

"Peter Domo's House" was a famous landmark in the division of the commons, in 1742, 
1743, ^^* ^'^^ '^ several times mentioned. The corners of two or three divisions were a 
certain number of rods from this house. 

When I cross this plain, I sometimes linger awhile near the spot where stood the lonely 
dwelling of Peter Domo. The hole which he used for a cellar is almost filled up, but pieces 
of brick still indicate that civilized man has lived there. In a near ravine, is the same spring 
of water that supplied Peter's family. There is now a fence where the sheep pasture fence 
was, and the ditch of the old common fence still stretches up the mountain side. Most of 
the old sheep pasture is now wood-land. Stately trees have grown there since Peter guarded 
the Hadley flock. 

About three-fourths of a mile north of Domo's house, by the side of the common fence, 
is the place of the old Indian fort, which has been before noticed. 220 rods south of Domo's 
house, where the mountain is steep, is the south end of the common fence. 

When I was young, I heard the expression, "as silly as Domer," and it was used in some 
of the river towns. This is said to have come from a foolish remark which Peter made to 
his wife, after some mischief-making young men had been joking and jeering him because 
he was governed by her. 

[This was written in 1848. The axe has since made an inroad among the trees of the 
sheep pasture, as in most other forests.] 


Equivalent Land — New Towns — Land Speculation — Tar and Turpentine — Candlewood 
— Scarcity of Timber — Floating timber down the Connecticut — Logs on the meadows — 
Rafts of boards— Carting by the Falls — Hadley Landings — Island between Northamp- 
ton and Hadley. 

EQUIVALENT Land. — Massachusetts, adhering to a wrong south 
line, which was run in 1642, and crossed Connecticut River several 
miles too far south, granted south of the true line 105,793 acres of 
land, mostly to Suffield, Enfield and Woodstock, but partly to 
individuals and other towns. After a long controversy, it was 
agreed in 17 13 that Massachusetts should give to Connecticut 


the same number of acres as an equivalent, and that the towns 
named should remain to Massachusetts.* In 1715, two men 
from Connecticut and one from Massachusetts laid out for Con- 
necticut 105,793 acres, viz., 51,850 acres east of Hadley, after- 
wards in Belchertown and Pelham,f 10,000 acres afterwards in 
Ware, and 43,943 acres at Coasset, above the present village of 
Brattleboro', Massachusetts then claiming the lower part of Ver- 
mont and New Hampshire. 

In April, 1716, the agents of Connecticut sold the 105,793 acres, 
at auction, in Hartford, for 683 pounds, or a trifle more than three 
half pence per acre. The land was held in 16 shares. 

New Towns. — After the peace of 1713, permanent settlements 
were begun at Northfield and Swampfield,t (Sunderland,) in 
1714. The inhabitants of the latter were chiefly from Hadley 
and Hatfield. Brimfield was settled about the same time, and 
there were twelve towns and plantations in the county. All but 
Enfield and Brimfield had been commenced previous to Philip's 
w\ar, forty years before. After the close of the fourth Indian war 
in 1726, there was peace until 1744, and many new settlements 
were commenced in Hampshire. There were inhabitants at Cold 
Spring, (Belchertown,) about as early as at East Hadley, (Am- 
herst,) and Aaron Lyman was a licensed innkeeper at Cold 
Spring in 1728, indicating that there was considerable travel 
between Hadley and Brookfield. 

Land Speculation was known in New England in the 17th 
century. Roger Williams said in 1670, that there was a great 
desire for getting large portions of land in this wilderness. The 
reforming synod of 1679, noticed among the evils, "an insatiable 
desire after land in many professors." Land speculation was 
much more common in the i8th century, especially after the peace 
of 1726. Many men in Boston, Salem and in country towns 
made extensive purchases of wild lands in the new towns and in 
the outward commons of old towns; generally in Hampshire at 
prices equivalent to from one shilling to three shillings per acre, 

*In 1747, these towns, and Somers which had been set off from Enfield, requested the 
General Assembly of Connecticut to take them under that government, and they were re- 
ceived in 1749. ^y *1"^ revolt, Massachusetts lost four towns, three of them in Hampshire. 

■j-It was the west line of this land that cut off so much, not unjustly, from the east division 
of Amherst. 

jMuch work must have been done at Swampfield by Hadley men and others, before 
Philip's war in 1675. They were fencing in 1674 and 1675. I" 1685, Joseph Hawley 
mentioned that there was an old ditch for a fence four miles long, on the outside of the swamp, 
and that above 100 acres of plow-land had been formerly broken up. Old chimneys and 
cellars are noticed in some records. See page 181. 


in money at six shillings to a dollar. Before 1745, much land 
in the Hampshire towns was held by speculators. Ezekiel Kel- 
logg, a trader in Hadley, was a noted land-jobber. In 1729 and 
1730, he bought 25 lots in the Amherst Divisions, and sold them 
to Col. Samuel Brown of Salem and others. He purchased in 
Sunderland Addition, (Leverett,) 17 lots containing 3128 acres 
and sold them in 1731 to Wm. Brown of Salem, for four shillings 
per acre in province bills, equal to 25 cents. In 1734, he sold 
2124 acres in the eastern part of Northfield to James Brown 
of Newport, R. I., at a sum equal to 22 cents per acre. He bought 
and sold land south of Holyoke and in other places. There was 
much buying and selling of the equivalent land at Cold Spring. 
In 1722, twelve men, seven of them Northampton farmers, bought 
8400 acres at Cold Spring at three shillings per acre in bills, equal 
then to half the sum in good money or 25 cents. Those who sold 
in a few years gained little or nothing, and some lost.* 

Tar was early made in New England. John Tinker from 
Massachusetts, and John Griffin and Michael Humphrey of 
Windsor, first made tar in Connecticut, at Massaco, (Simsbury,) 
in 1643. Some years after, much tar was made at Windsor. In 
1646, John Clarke and others of Springfield were gathering 
candlewood on the plains to make tar. In 1650, it was ordered 
by Springfield that no person should gather and burn candle- 
wood for making tar, pitch or coal within six miles east of the 
great river, but every inhabitant might gather candlewood 
for his family use where he pleased. No records show when the 
people of Northampton, Hadley and Hatfield began to make tar. 
In Hadley in 1704, all persons were forbidden *'to draw candled 
wood for tar," in the bounds of the town, without liberty from 
the selectmen. In 17 14, all that drew candlewood for tar without 
liberty, were to be prosecuted. The candlewood seems to have 
been needed for light. f 

*In 1738, John Stoddard of Northampton, sold to the Scotch, (often called Scotch-Irish,) 
who were about to settle at Pelham, 14,137 acres of the northern part of the equivalent land, 
for 7300 pounds in bills of credit, equal to 2s. 7d. an acre, in proclamation money, or 43 
cents. This land was bought for settlement. 

After Canada was conquered, and there was no fear of Indians, vast quantities of land in 
New England and other colonies were laid open to the farmer and speculator. But all the 
land speculation in the colonies was trifling in comparison with what has taken place since 
1783 in the United States. Our laws and government often practically favor the sharper 
and the speculator. 

•j-Governor John Winthrop of Connecticut, being in England, read a paper before the 
Royal Society in London, July 9, 1662, on "Making Pitch and Tar in New England." He 
noticed the pitch pines that grew on barren plains, from which the tar was made, and de- 
scribed the pine knots and the tar kilns. He said many old trees had been blown down ages 


Turpentine was not gathered for market until many years after 
tar was made. It was procured from live pine trees, chiefly pitch 
pines; and the business may have been begun in Hadley as early 
as 1685. The trees were boxed, that is, a hollow place was cut in 
them with an axe, and the turpentine that collected in these boxes 
was dipped out and put into barrels and sent to Boston. The 
town regulated the boxing, intending to prevent damage to valua- 
ble pine timber, and did not allow any to box trees on the com- 
mons without leave. In 1701, the penalty for boxing without 
liberty was 2s. 6d. a tree; in 1 702, 5s. a tree. Pine trees were let for 
one year or more. In 1696, three men had the liberty of the pine 
trees west of Spruce hill, and others might use the pines near 
Partrigg's swamp. In 1703, the town voted to sell the pine trees 
for three years, between the Brookfield road and Bachelor's 
River, north and south of Holyoke, to those who would give the 
worth of them; and all other pines on the commons that were not 
likely to be beneficial for timber. In 1708, Westwood Cook had 
the use of the pine trees for turpentine, between the mountain, 
Bay road and certain brooks, one year, for 40 shillings. In 17 14, 
Joseph Nash had the liberty of pine trees enough to cut 1000 
boxes, on the south side of Stony brook, towards the mouth. He 
paid for them. In 1723, the pine trees on Lawrence's plain and 
some lands adjoining, were let to Luke Smith "for the drawing 
of turpentine," three years, for 28 pounds. A committee was 
chosen to lease the pines at the north-east and south-east corners 
of our bounds.* In 1726, the town voted to lease the trees on 
Lawrence's plain, after Luke Smith's time was out. 

Large quantities of turpentine and tar, from Hampshire county 
and Connecticut, were shipped at Hartford for Boston.f Much 

before, and had all perished except the knots where the bough was joined to the tree, and 
some of the body towards the root which was full of turpentine. The fires of the Indians 
that burnt up the dry and rotten parts of the old trees, only scorched the knots and wood 
full of resinous matter. Tar had been made in Massachusetts, Plymouth and Connecticut. 
Pitch was made of tar by boiling. 

*In 1723, Timothy Dwight of Northampton, and Ebenezer Marsh of Hadley, were ap- 
pointed by the General Court to let out the pine trees on the province lands in Hampshire. 
Dwight leased trees near Hadley, which he believed to be on p